Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This is a well-designed study, with clear results that is also very well-written.<br /> The authors nicely demonstrate that previous contradictory results are largely due to the lack of the proper baseline condition (Exp 1 and Exp 2). The second experiment also replicates the previous study results that had found enhancement. However, the addition of the proper baseline allows for a completely different interpretation of the same results. In the final experiment, they further probe the role of prediction in attenuation of predicted touch and demonstrate that attenuation is due to the ability to predict the consequences of active touch.

Overall, I found the paper had many strengths including the pre-registered protocols, the replication of findings both in favor of attenuation and enhancements, the inclusion of a baseline condition to compare active touch manipulations, and lastly a rigorous analysis of the data.

While in part this confirms previous results on sensory attenuation, it also helps interpret previous results that suggest the contrary. Therefore the results will be of high value to the community.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Many studies have found that self-generated tactile contact is perceived as weaker than the same contact with an external source. A recent high-profile study found that a force that was predictable based on a participant's own movement but was not caused by contact was perceived as stronger than the same force in an interleaved no-go condition without movement. By combining methods from this and older studies within a single design, the present study resolves the apparent contradiction by showing that the predictable force is enhanced only relative to the no-go reference, and that forces are attenuated when self-contact occurs or is predicted.

The key strength of this work lies in the robust application of pre-registered methods to reproduce and compare findings within a single experimental setting that have been separately interpreted as enhancement or attenuation in previous work. The results are admirably clear and decisive.

I feel there is room for some conceptual clarification when it comes to the discussion of appropriate baselines. The paper tends (as does the preceding work by Thomas et al.) towards claims of the absolute kind, such as "self-generated sensation is attenuated" (or "enhanced"), that are not meaningful because the scales of sensation and stimulus are incommensurate (e.g. there is no sensation that is objectively equal to 2N of force on the finger). Rather, the only claims that can or should be made are relative ones, e.g. "self-generated sensation is attenuated *compared to* externally-generated sensation". The present results provide a strong confirmation of this existing claim while clarifying that the recent findings of Thomas et al.'s Exp 1 could be better summarized as "predictable sensations are enhanced in trials with a GO signal compared to a NOGO signal". So it is not that one study chose the "right" baseline and the other the "wrong" one, but rather that Thomas et al. extrapolated their results to comparisons other than the one they had tested.

The paper does not directly address Thomas et al.'s Exp 2, in which they observed enhanced sensation of force in an expected compared to an unexpected finger. Because there was never any (real or virtual) contact between the fingers in that experiment, the authors would probably argue that it is irrelevant to the classical "predictive attenuation" hypothesis, but the results nonetheless suggest the existence of another factor influencing force perception that is not explained by NOGO inhibition.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The authors sought to directly compare the predictions of two models of somatosensory processing: The attenuation model, which states that the sensation of touch on one hand is reduced when it is the predictable result of an active movement by the other hand; and the enhancement model, which states that the sensation of touch is actually increased, as long as the active hand does not receive touch stimultaneously with the passive hand (no double stimulation). The authors achieved their aims, with results clearly demonstrating (1) attenuation in the case of self touch, (2) that previously-observed enhancement is a consequence of the comparison condition (false enhancement), and (3) that attenuation involves predictive mechanisms and does not result simply from double stimulation. These findings, and the methodology, should particularly impact future studies of perceptual attenuation, sensory prediction error, and motor control more generally. The opposite conclusions obtainable by selecting different comparison conditions is particularly striking.

Experiment 1 affirms that a touch to the passive finger caused by the active finger tapping a force sensor is perceived as weaker (attenuated) compared to a baseline not involving the active finger, but that if double stimulation is prevented (active finger moves, but no contact), neither attenuation nor enhancement occurs. Experiment 2 includes the three original conditions, plus the no-go condition used as a comparison in these earlier studies. Results suggest that the comparisons used by previous studies would result in the false appearance of enhancement. Finally, Experiment 3 tests the hypothesis that the lack of attenuation in the no-contact condition is due to the absence of double stimulation rather than predictive mechanisms. When contact and no-contact trials were mixed in an 80:20 ratio, such that participants would form predictions about the consequence of their active finger movement even if some trials lacked contact. In this case, attenuation was observed for both contact and no-contact trials, supporting the idea that attenuation is related to predictive processes linked to moving the active finger, and is not a simple consequence of double stimulation.

The methodology and analysis plans for all three experiments were pre-registered prior to data collection. We can therefore be very confident that the results were not influenced by hypotheses developed only after seeing the data. The three experiments were each performed in a new set of participants. Experiments 2 and 3 included conditions that replicated the Experiment 1 effects, allowing us to be very confident that the results are robust.

While the study has significant strengths, some aspects of the interpretation need to be clarified. In particular, the authors' interpretation depends on the idea that attenuation is absent in the no-contact condition because this action-sensory consequence relationship is an "arbitrary mapping." It is not clear what makes it arbitrary. The self-touch contact condition could also be considered somewhat arbitrary and different from real self-touch; the 2N test force was triggered by the right finger tapping a force sensor. If participants' tapping forces were recorded, it would be useful to include this information, particularly about how variable participants' taps were. In other words, unlike real self-touch, in this paradigm the force of the active finger tap did not affect the force delivered to the passive finger. One additional potential weakness is that participants' vision was occluded in Experiment 3, but not in Experiments 1 and 2. The authors do not discuss whether this difference could confound any of the analyses that compare results across experiments.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript the authors perform a detailed analysis of the impact of food type on reproduction in C. elegans. They find that, in comparison with the standard OP50 strain of E. coli that is ubiquitously used to maintain C. elegans in the laboratory setting, the CS180 strain results in a reduction in the number of progeny that may be a consequence of an early transition from spermatogenesis to oogenesis that reduces total sperm number. They also find that the rate of oocyte fertilization is increased in animals fed CS180 vs. OP50. Using mutants and laser ablations, the authors show that, whereas the insulin-like peptide INS-6 acts in the ASJ sensory neurons to mediate the food type effect on total progeny and early oogenesis, the increased fertilization rate phenotype does not require ASJ or insulin-like signaling and instead requires the AWA olfactory neurons.

The major strengths of the manuscript are the establishment of INS-6 as a link between food type and reproduction and the detail and rigor with which the experiments were executed. The results presented generally support the authors' model. This role of insulin-like signaling in connecting food type and reproduction makes it a plausible target for evolutionary forces that may have shaped insulin-like signaling in invertebrates. As such, this work contributes broadly to our understanding of how insulin signaling may have evolved prior to the emergence of vertebrates.

A weakness of the work is the epistasis analysis of insulin-like pathway components, which is incomplete and at times difficult to interpret.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The manuscript by Mishra et al. examines the modulation of the nervous system by different bacterial food to influence reproductive phenotypes-specifically onset of oogenesis, fertilization rate, and progeny production. Defining how animal reproduction could be modulated by bacterial food cues through neuroendocrine signaling is a fascinating subject of study for which C. elegans is well-suited. However, the overall scope of the current study is limited, and some of the central data do not provide compelling evidence for the authors' underlying hypothesis and model.

1. Two strains of E. coli are examined, the standard C. elegans bacterial food strain OP50 and an E. coli strain that Alcedo and colleagues have previously characterized to influence aging and longevity through nervous system modulation. While the authors determine that differences in LPS structure present between the strains does not account for the food-dependent effects, there is little further insight regarding the bacterial features that contribute to the observed differences in reproductive physiology. Moreover, at least two of the phenotypes examined-total progeny and fertilization rate-are known to be affected by bacterial food quality and may be affected by bacteria in many ways, so the description of these phenotypes is somewhat less compelling than the study of the onset of oogenesis.

2. The onset of oogenesis phenotype, using the lin-41::GFP reporter, seems more specific and tractable, and the authors nicely decouple this phenotype from the total progeny and fertilization rate phenotypes through experiments that shift animals to different bacterial food at specific developmental stages. However, as it stands, the data regarding the role of ins-6 and ASJ in modulating this phenotype, and the model that exposure to CS180 bacterial food causes a change in the ASJ expression of ins-6, which is sufficient to promote the earlier onset of oogenesis at the mid-L4 stage, seems somewhat incomplete and have some inconsistencies to be addressed.

a. The ins-6 mutant phenotype is rescued by genome ins-6 and partially rescued by ins-6 expressed under and ASJ-specific promoter. The lack of rescue from an ASI promoter is puzzling given the secreted nature of ins-6.

b. The ins-6 mutant phenotype with regard to delaying the early expression of lin-41::GFP on CS180 appears weaker than the daf-2 mutant phenotype. This is difficult to reconcile with what is known about the relative strength of the daf-2 mutant alleles relative to ins-6 for a wide range of phenotypes.

c. The daf-16 loss-of-function phenotype and suppression of daf-2 and ins-6 mutant phenotypes are not shown for the lin-41::GFP expression phenotype.

d. The modest difference in ins-6p::mCherry expression in the ASJ neurons (Figure 5D) make the idea that this difference causes onset of oogenesis somewhat implausible.

e. The strain carrying an genetic ablation of ASJ appears to have a markedly different baseline of kinetics of lin-41::GFP expression (even at lethargus, less than half of the animals appear to express lin-41::GFP). Given this phenotype, it seems difficult to draw conclusions about bacterial food-dependent effects on expression of lin-41::GFP. Additional characterization corroborating timing of oogenesis independent of the lin-41::GFP marker may be helpful, but something seems amiss.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

I very much enjoyed reading this paper by Shashwat Mishra and team from Joy Alcedo's and from Queelim Ch'ng's laboratories dissecting how sensory signals regulate reproduction in worms. The mechanisms by which sensory inputs affect the function of the germline, the balance between growth and differentiation within this tissue, are of broad interest not only to those interested in reproduction and differentiation, but also to those interested in the mechanisms of plasticity that enable organisms to adjust to changing environmental conditions. These mechanisms are only now beginning to be characterized. Here the focus is on the role of insulin signals expressed in sensory neurons. This work builds on previous findings by the Alcedo lab that sensory perception of bacterial-type dependent signals regulates C. elegans lifespan. Here their focus is on the effects on reproduction, and on the communication of that information by insulin-like signals.

Worms have a huge family of 40 insulin-like genes, which the Alcedo and Ch'ng labs have been studying for many years. The paper starts with the interesting premise that the brood size of the worms is food type dependent. The authors show that this is due to effects on the timing of the onset of oogenesis during larval development (which constrains the size of the pool of sperm available for subsequent oocyte fertilization) as well as on effects on the rate of oocyte fertilization during adulthood. Using clever timing for food switching, they show that the effects on oogenesis onset and on fertilization rate are separable. In addition, these effects did not appear to be merely the outcome of indirect effects of food ingestion, but were, instead, at least in part, due to the perception of environmental information by specific sensory neurons. Using mutants affecting transduction of sensory information in specific neurons and genetic ablation of specific neurons, the authors show that the onset of oogenesis and the rate of reproduction were controlled by different sensory neurons, ASJ and AWA, respectively. One of these neurons, ASJ, transmitted environmental information via the ins-6 neuropeptide.

Altogether, the paper advances our understanding of how environmental determinants influence reproduction.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The manuscript by Justynski et al., addresses an important question in the field of efferocytosis, namely how does the clearance of apoptotic cells promote wound healing. A major highlight of this work is the profiling of the transcriptional heterogeneity during the inflammatory phase of the wound healing program via single cell sequencing. Many of the genes analyzed in the manuscript are well-known players in efferocytosis and wound healing so the contribution of this work is the dynamic and high resolution temporal and cell type specific responses during injury mediated inflammation.

Overall the manuscript is technically sound and the conclusions are generally supported by the data. However, the authors are cautioned to tone down some of the sentences with the human diabetic samples as they rely heavily on extrapolation rather experimental tests. Other areas of improvement include the relatively simplistic approaches and interpretation of the results. For instance, the antibody inhibition of Axl had minimal effect on the clearance of apoptotic cells in the wound and this would be expected with the redundancy endowed by other TAM receptors.

There are also some inconsistencies between the quantifications and the representative images provided. For instance, in Figure 6, the number of TUNEL+ cells seem to be higher in the IgG samples compared to the anti-Timd4 treatment, but this is not the case in the quantification.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Based on their results the authors make the following statements:<br /> 1) Apoptotic pathways and efferocytosis receptors are elevated in fibroblasts and immune cells in mouse skin wounds. Based on the analysis of the scRNASeq data this is a valid conclusion.

I suggest to repeat the quantification of cells containing active caspase-3 with an anti-cleaved caspase-3 antibody. Here the authors use an antibody recognizing phospho S150 antibody, which is far from generally accepted to be a marker for active caspase-3.

It would also be good to quantify the apoptotic cells observed in the sections (Fig 1 I and J) and compare to control treatment on sections. It is not clear from the data presented whether the number of apoptotic cells increases or not in the time frame analyzed since the controls are lacking. In a FACS analysis (Fig S1 H), the authors show that there is no increase in dead cells in a time frame of 48 hrs. Could it be that the majority of the cells that may have died in vivo, were lost during the procedure of tissue digestions. Dead cells tend to aggregate.

On line 104 the authors refer to the apoptosis-inducing activity of G0s2. Please, realize that there is little or no in vivo evidence for a role of G0s2 in apoptosis.

The authors state that Axl is uniquely expressed in DC and fibroblasts (Fig 2). Are the Axl-cells positive in panel G (red, Fig 2) that do not stain for the Pdgfra marker (green) then all DCs? Please clarify or show with a triple staining that these cells are indeed DCs. In addition, it is not clear to me to what reference level exactly the expression levels are compared in Fig 2A. Is this between the 24 and 48h time points after wounding (as mentioned in the legend)? If so, the analysis may indicate up or down regulation but not necessarily expression or no expression.

2) Human diabetic wounds display increased and altered efferocytosis signaling via Axl.<br /> This conclusion is solely based on CellChat analysis and should be tuned down or validated. Tools like CellChat or NicheNet generate data that are suggestive and help scientist to build hypothesis. However, these data do not hold formal proof, but should be experimentally validated. Alternatively, the statement should be downtuned.

3) Axl expression is regulated via an TLR3-independent mechanism during wounding. This statement is supported by analysis in a genetic mouse model.

4) In mice, Axl signaling is required for wound repair but is dispensable for efferocytosis.<br /> This was concluded based on an in vivo experiment in which the authors treat the mice during wound healing with neutralizing anti-Axl antibodies that were validated in literature. The effectivity of the treatment is checked by analyzing the Axl mRNA levels since Axl activation upregulates its own mRNA expression levels. Anti-Axl therapy resulted in a downregulation of the Axl mRNA levels, while IFN-beta levels (an inducer of Axl expression) were upregulated by the treatment.<br /> The authors conclude that anti-Axl treatment leads to healing defects based on lack of granulation tissue and larger scabs, a reduction of fibroblast repopulation and revascularization. The differences in the last two parameters mentioned above are obvious, however the other parameters, as granulation tissue and scabs are less clear to me. Is this quantified in any way? In Fig S4 D there is also a large scab visible in the control treatment image. Therefore, it would be good if these parameters could be better substantiated. In view of the lack of revascularization, are there differences in the mRNA expression levels of angiogenic factors such as VEGF and others at this time point? Does revascularization occur at later stages?.<br /> Based on the FACS analysis the authors claim that there are no differences at the level of DCs. However, the plots shown in Fig 5C do not convincingly show the detection of DC (as boxed in the lower panel). Based on the density plots one would presume this is just the continuation of the CD11b+ population and not a separate CD11c+ population. To get a better view on that, it would be better to show dot plots instead of density plots.<br /> Finally, the authors state (line 265-266) that anti-Axl treatment leads to non-significantly increased expression of IL1alpha and IL6 after one day of injury (Fig S4C). If the difference between the control-treated and the anti-Axl-treated group is statistically not significant I would not conclude there is an increase. Please adapt phrasing or include more mice in the experiment (now only 4) to substantiate the observation and clarify whether it is increased or not.

5) Inhibition of the efferocytosis receptor Timd4 decreases efferocytosis and abrogates wound repair.<br /> The reason to study the effect of Timd4 was based on the fact that the authors find it upregulated on DCs during wound healing.<br /> The contribution of Timd4 in wound healing was investigated in vivo, under conditions in which the mice were treated with an anti-Timd4 antibody.<br /> The authors conclude that overall healing was not affected but that the wound beds appeared more fragile. What is meant with 'appeared more fragile' is not clear. In addition, this seems to me a quite subjective interpretation. What are the objective parameters to come this conclusion?<br /> Similar to inhibition of Axl, inhibition of Timd4 led to a defect in revascularization as witnessed by the absence of CD31 staining. Also in this experiment one can raise similar questions as in the anti-Axl experiment: 1) does revascularization occur at a later timepoint; 2) what about the expression of angiogenic factors?<br /> In the anti-Timd4 treated wounds the authors observe more TUNEL-positive cells and conclude that this is due to a defect in efferocytosis. However, the formal experimental proof for this in the current model is lacking. How do the authors exclude the possibility that anti-Timd4 treatment attracts more infiltrating cells that then undergo treatment, or that the treatment with anti-Timd4 leads to more apoptosis of certain cells in the wound bed. What is the nature of these apoptotic cells (neutrophils, T cells, others)? It has been shown that Timd4 can have stimulatory effects on other cells, such as T cells. Could deprivation of Timd4 signaling in certain conditions lead to more dying cells in this model?

Based on the comments and concerns raised above, this study appears premature at this stage.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This is a clearly written report on experiments examining apoptosis and efferocytosis gene alterations in the very early stages of cutaneous wound healing. The authors have identified a number of differentially expressed genes related to apoptosis and efferocytosis in fibroblasts, neutrophils, dendritic cells and monocytes/macrophages. Additional functional experiments were carried out which show that inhibiting efferocytosis pathways can alter different aspects of wound healing, depending on the pathway that is targeted. The scRNA-seq data in mouse wounds is rigorous and follow-up functional studies in mice were done, which is an overall strength of the work. The main weaknesses were related to small sample sizes for some experiments and some conclusions that were not supported by strong data. Overall, this is interesting work that could be bolstered with additional supporting data for some key experiments.

1) The authors suggest in several places that efferocytosis must be occurring rapidly since the number of apoptotic cells are not high in their samples. There are issues with this conclusion in my opinion. They never do show that there is an increase in apoptotic cells in the wounds, which then go down (which would be a sign that the cells are being cleared via efferocytosis. In addition, they are looking for apoptotic cells at very early time points (24-48 hours), times at which large numbers of apoptotic cells would not be expected. As an example, neutrophil infiltration peaks at 24-48 hours and efferocytosis of apoptotic neutrophils would be expected after that. Other types of apoptotic cells would likely be cleared even later. Finally, several of the panels showing apoptotic cells were done with a very small number of samples (1-3 per group) in some cases so it is unclear how rigorous the data are. I would recommend that the authors at the very least soften the wording related to these conclusions and discuss the limitations of their experimental design; ideally data from more samples would be included to provide clear support those statements.

2) The human RNA-seq data is also quite limited, as non-diabetic wound tissue was all from one patient. Again, this limitation should be acknowledged. Also, there are some important published papers by Sashwati Roy's group indicating that there are defects in efferocytosis in diabetic wounds, which may go against what the authors are showing here to some degree. Discussion of the authors' work in relation to these other studies should be discussed.

3) For anti-Axl and anti-Timd4 experiments, the authors conclude that inhibition of Axl does not affect TUNEL+ cells and that Timd4 does not affect reepithelialization. However, in some cases the sample size was only 3 mice per group when measuring these parameters. That is a very small number of samples to draw conclusions about apoptotic cells or reepithelialization since these parameters are key for the overall conclusions of the experiments. Given that these are key data, it would be important to include more than n=3. Additionally, as stated above, a time point later than 24 h may be necessary to actually see changes in apoptotic cells.

4) In Fig 6, there look to be many more TUNEL+ cells in the wound bed of IgG control samples compared to anti-Timd4-treated samples, which contradicts the graph. Perhaps the authors could clarify where they were taking their measurements for panels with image analysis results. Another question related to this experiment is how it is possible that efferocytosis is so drastically different yet there are no changes in wound healing (this is one reason why a larger sample size for reepithelialization may be critical) - this would seem to suggest that efferocytosis is not important in wound healing, which is confusing. Further discussion on this might be useful.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Recently, chromatin-associated RNAs (caRNAs) were found to be involved in transcriptional regulation through multiple mechanisms, playing important roles in disease and development. Mitochondria has its own genome known as mtDNA, which codes crucial genes involved in oxidative phosphorylation. Additionally, mtDNA produces non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), including small and long noncoding RNAs, the functions of which are still being explored. The communication between mitochondria and the nucleus is essential for coordinating gene expression and cellular function. Recent studies have identified the presence of mitochondrial RNAs (mtRNAs) in the nucleus, such as SncmtRNA, which can influence stress-induced transcription of genes related to cell adhesion.

In this manuscript, using the iMARI (in situ mapping of RNA-Genome Interactions) technology developed by the authors, they found that mitochondria-encoded lncRNA plays a role in regulating nuclear gene expressions. They then performed experimental confirmation, bulk-RNA-seq, snRNA, and scRNA-seq to demonstrate and verify the function of SncmtRNA in regulating nuclear gene expression in endothelial cells. This discovery is ground-breaking and the manuscript provides convincing evidence that mitochondrial RNAs can enter the cellular nucleus to regulate gene expression.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The communication between mitochondria and the nucleus is crucial for maintaining cellular homeostasis and coordinating various cellular processes. The work by Sriram and colleagues discovers a potentially novel messenger molecule between mitochondrial-nuclear crosstalk through the widespread association of mitochondrial RNAs with nuclear chromatin. They termed this as mt-caRNAs that establishes a direct connection between mtRNA and the epigenome. These mt-caRNAs were found to preferentially attach to promoter regions, which led them to investigate how mt-caRNAs may regulate nuclear-encoded transcripts. Using an endothelial cell model, depletion/ overexpression of a specific mt-caRNA altered stress-induced transcription of nuclear genes encoding for innate inflammation and endothelial activation. Overall, these findings are interesting and warrant further investigation of the role of mt-caRNA-mediated nuclear transcription in controlling cellular processes.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In their work, Akuma and colleagues identify the autoprocessing in cis of casp11 as a key step that allows the aggregation of casp11, and its capacity to cleave GSDMD and induce pyroptosis. The authors utilize, for the first time, a fluorescent casp11 that allowed us to visualize its aggregation (formation of specks). This is a key event that was largely overlooked for casp11. Indeed, casp11 directly binds LPS and initiates pyroptosis in the absence of other NLR members and adaptors such as ASC. While NLRs and adaptors form the structure that allows the recruitment and cleavage of casp1, how casp11 specks are formed remained unknown so far. Using casp11 mutants that lack the catalytic activity or the autoprocessing site, as well as casp11 that can be cleaved by other proteases, the authors demonstrate that self-cleavage of casp11 is a pre-requisite for aggregation and speck formation. Also, by using their mutants the authors demonstrated that casp11 acts in cis, rather than in trans, to exert this function. So far, mostly based on casp1 biology, the main view was that aggregation is a prerequisite for cleaving. Here the authors changed this view for casp11, and found that casp11 autocleavage is upstream of its aggregation induced upon LPS sensing. They found that initial dimerization and subsequent oligomerization are two distinct events and that LPS binding of casp11 is insufficient to assemble the non-canonical inflammasome.

The paper makes use of elegant mutant caspases and is based on solid bases. Some experiments lack analyses of the functional consequences of non-canonical inflammasome formation, and the paper would benefit from this type of analysis.

Another key finding is that Cys-254 plays more roles than "simply" cleaving casp11 at D285. This finding needs to be better highlighted also in the abstract because it opens more future investigations.

Also, the separation between dimerization and oligomerization may open to future studies and may be briefly mentioned also in the abstract.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Casp11 is a cytosolic sensor for LPS in mice (orthologue of Casp4/5 in human). It is an important innate sensor of intracellular infection. Casp11 activity results in cleavage and activation of the pore-forming protein Gasdemin D (GSDMD) leading to lytic death (pyroptosis), of an infected cell. How exactly Casp11 signals upon LPS detection is beginning to be understood, but the picture is incomplete. Previous reports suggested that upon LPS detection, Casp11 dimerizes and undergoes auto-processing to form a pyroptosis-competent enzyme. The prediction from these studies was that the formation of a fully functional Casp11 signalling complex involves two steps: inducible dimerization and auto-processing.

In this study, authors used fluorescently tagged Casp11 reporter fusions, to report that detection of cytosolic LPS induces Casp11 assembly into a large perinuclear speck to form a signalling complex, where GSDMD can be processed. Such signalling complex resembles signalling specks formed upon the activation of other canonical inflammasomes.

Strengths:

Results are clean, experiments well controlled, and support the conclusions. Overall conclusions fit nicely in the general principle of innate signalling, whereby activation of many innate sensors results in their inducible assembly into higher-order oligomeric signalling complexes, called supra-molecular organizing centers (SMOCs).

A surprising finding from this work was that catalytically inactive Casp11 (C254A mutant) did not form signalling specks, despite being able to bind LPS and dimerise. This model is proposed where LPS binding to the CARD domain of Casp11 and Casp11 dimerization is necessary but not sufficient to mediate Casp11 speck formation within cells. The Casp11 catalytic activity is needed to facilitate the assembly of the higher-order, pyroptosis-competent Casp11 signalling platform. The model is further supported by experimental evidence that auto-processing of Casp11, by an exogenous protease TEV, (i.e. in the absence of LPS), is sufficient to mediate speck assembly in cells expressing wild type, but not catalytically inactive Casp11 mutant.

Possible technical improvements:

In general, the authors achieved their aims, and the results support the conclusions.

For technical robustness, it would be nice to consider a few controls:<br /> (a) Visualise Casp11 specks using constructs with smaller tags, and test whether tag placement on N or C terminus matters for speck formation; or<br /> (b) Biochemically crosslink and isolate endogenous, untagged Casp11 specks upon LPS transfection of primed macrophages (e.g. after priming through IFNs or TLRs). This would mimic the natural upregulation and activation of endogenous Casp11.<br /> (c) Test what happens after actual intracellular pathogen detection when the pathogen itself serves as a signalling platform? Are specks stills formed (or even needed)?

The broad impact of the work, implication, and questions for future work:

Results of this study would suggest that the enzymatic activity of Casp11 in macrophages may be highly restricted to the speck location, similar to what was described for Casp1. This may explain the very restricted substrate repertoire of Casp11 in cells, likely controlled by the substrate recruitment to the speck. This also opens avenues for follow-up work to answer several emerging questions:

1. After LPS binding and dimerization, why Casp11 must undergo intra-molecular processing to induce the formation of a pyroptosis-competent speck? Is there any substrate for LPS-bound, uncleaved Casp11 (beyond Casp11 itself), before Casp11 forms a full speck for GSDMD processing? The only currently known targets of Casp11 activity are itself, and GSDMD. Also, after intradomain linker cleavage of Casp11, what additional substrate must the cleaved Casp11 process to allow full speck formation?

2. Can activity probes be designed to detect the location of the active Casp11, and if so, would the activity of Casp11 be restricted to the speck? Is there a second cleavage event that would eventually dissociate Casp11 from the speck, to terminate its signalling? If not, how is speck activity terminated? If specks are released by lysis, are they capable of seeding new speck formation in neighbouring phagocytes, in prion-like behaviour previously described for canonical ASC speck?

3. What is the role of macrophage priming in speck formation, and what roles, if any GBPs play in speck formation?

4. Does this model apply to human orthologues, Casp4/5?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Casp11 plays an important role in host defense against a wide range of pathogens; however, it also promotes autoinflammatory disorders when dysregulated. Unlike other ASC-dependent receptors, Casp11 forms a non-canonical inflammasome via LPS-indued self-assembly. Here, Brodsky and colleagues report that the catalytic activity of casp11 is required to form LPS-induced "SMOCs."

Here are my concerns/questions:

• I'm having some difficulty understanding the logic of Figure 5 in determining cis processing. It is an inverse of figure 4, and in my view, provides further evidence of trans processing. A better experiment would to be use WT-citrine tagged protein with catalytic dead mcherry and image them together. This would show WT cis processing occurs faster than trans processing as citrine specks should appear earlier than the mCherry ones. Can also do colocalization and FRET-based assays with the pair.

• Do those casp11 specks still contain CARDs?- i.e. is the second cleavage necessary for speck formation? Is CARD necessary at all? Would adding the TEV site at CDL and b/w p20 and p10 rescue? i.e. trans-activate?

• What are the equations that fit experimental data points and R2 for? E.g. Figure 1E. What are the parameters being fitted/compared and how are those interpreted? A table of fitted values and proper interpretation should be provided.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This paper examines different signaling networks and attempts to give general results for when the network will exhibit biphasic behavior, which is the situation when the output of the network is a non-monotonic function of its inputs. The strength of the paper is in the approach it takes. It starts with the simplest network motifs that produce biphasic behavior and then asks too what happens when these motifs are parts of larger networks. Their approach is in contrast to the usual way in which this question is tackled, which tends to be within the confines of a specific signaling network, where general results like the ones that the authors are after, might be hard to spot.

The weakness of the paper, in my opinion, is the rather formal description of the results which I am afraid will be of rather limited utility to experimental groups seeking to make use of them. The paper attempts to provide general rules for when to expect biphasic behavior and it was hard to assess to what extent such rules exist as behaviors can change depending on the context of a larger network in which the smaller biphasic one is embedded. The other thing that made assessing the generality of the results difficult is that the input-output functions shown in all the figures are computed for a specific choice of parameters and I was left wondering how different choices of parameters might change the reported behaviors. The lack of specific proposals for how their results should guide future experiments on different signaling networks is another weakness.

While I appreciate that the authors adopted a style of presenting their results such that all the mathematics is buried in the figures, I found that it made reading the paper quite difficult, and contributed to my confusion about which results are general and insensitive to parameter choices and which are not. I believe a narrative that integrated the math with some simple intuition might have been more effective. For example, when the authors say in the text that model M0 is incapable of displaying biphasic response, how general is that result? Later on, when discussing model M2, they provide a criterion for biphasic response in terms of products of rate constants satisfying an inequality, but the meaning of this condition is not described. Such things make it hard to learn from the authors' work.

The text is sprinkled with statements like "this reveals the plurality of information processing behaviors..." where the meaning is quite opaque (for this example, there is no description of "information processing" and what it might mean in this context) and therefore it makes it hard to understand what are the lessons learned from these calculations. Another example is found in the description of Erk regulation where the authors speak of "significant robustness" but what is meant by "significant" is also unclear.

Overall, I think this is an interesting attempt to provide a general mathematical framework for analyzing biphasic response of signaling networks, but the authors fall short for the reasons described above. I think a lot can be fixed by improving the way the results are presented.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Biphasic responses are widely observed in biological systems and the determination of general design principles underlying biphasic responses is an important problem. The authors attempt to study this problem using a range of biochemical signaling models ranging from simple enzymatic modification and de-modification of a single substrate to systems with multiple enzymes and substrates. The authors used analytical and computational calculations to determine conditions such as network topology, range of concentrations, and rate parameters that could give rise to biphasic responses. I think the approach and the result of their investigation are interesting and can be potentially useful. However, the conditions for biphasic responses are described in terms of parameter ranges or relationships in particular biochemical models, and these parameters have not been connected to the values of concentrations or rates in real biological systems. This makes it difficult to evaluate how these findings would be applicable in nature or in experiments. It might also help if some general mechanisms in terms of competition/cooperation of time scales/processes are gleaned which potentially can be used to analyze biphasic responses in real biological systems.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This interesting manuscript sets out to develop for the mouse a series of important concepts and models that this group has previously developed for models of monkey brains, where they showed that in a large-scale model, anterior → posterior spatial gradients such as spine density (and thus inferred strength of local coupling) lead to a transition from transient stimulus responses to persistent responses, capable of supporting working memory (WM). No such spine density gradient is found in the mouse. Here, the authors propose and use modeling to explore the idea, that the corresponding gradient may be that of density of inhibitory PV cells in different regions of the brain.

The goal of the study - a large-scale, anatomically-constrained model of WM - is an extremely valuable one, and the authors' efforts in this direction should be supported. That said, some of the main claims in the manuscript were not, at least as currently written, clearly supported by the data, a number of important clarifications need to be made, and some claims of novelty are made in a way that, for a typical reader, may obscure the actual contribution being made.

The biggest issue is that one of the main claims, that together with cell-type specific long-range targeting, "density of cell classes define working memory representations" (abstract), is not terribly clear. For example, Figs. 2D and 2E show that a brain region's hierarchical location tightly predicts its persistent firing rate (2D), but that PV cell fraction has a far weaker correlation (2E). Is hierarchical location sufficient? If PV cell fraction were constant across model brain regions, would we still get persistent activity modes? It seems likely that the answer may be "yes", but the answer, easily within reach of the authors, is surprisingly not in the current version of the manuscript. Figure 3D, for the thalamocortical model, shows no significant correlation of firing rate with PV density.

Given the claim about PV density (in the abstract and the first main point of the discussion), this is a big concern. Yet it seems easily addressable: e.g. if indeed the authors found that hierarchy was sufficient and PV density immaterial, the model would be no less interesting. And if the authors demonstrated clearly that a PV density gradient is required, that would make the claim a solid one. If, within the model, such a causal demonstration is present, this reader at least missed it.

MAJOR CONCERNS:

(1) The model appears to be a model of a single side of the brain. Perhaps each brain region in the model could be considered an amalgam of that region across both sides of the brain. Yet given results like Li et al. Nature 2016, who show that persistent activity is robust to inhibition of one side, but not both sides of ALM, at the very least discussion of the issue is warranted.

(2) The authors make an interesting attempt to distinguish core WM regions from other regions such as "readout" regions, defined as showing persistent activity yet not having an effect on persistent activity elsewhere in the network.<br /> However, this definition seemed problematic: for example, consider a network that consists of 20 brain regions, all interconnected to each other, and all equivalent to each other, capable of displaying persistent activity thanks to mutual connectivity. Imagine that inhibition of any one of these regions is not sufficient to significantly perturb persistent activity in the other 19. Then they would all be labeled as "readout". Yet, by construction in this thought experiment, they are all equivalent to each other and are all core areas. Such redundancy may well be present in the brain. How would the authors address this redundancy issue?

(3) Also important to discuss would be the fact that every brain region in this model is set up as composed of two populations, and when long-range interactions are strong and the attractors strongly coupled, the entire brain is set up as a 1-bit working memory. How would results and the approach be impacted by considering WM for more flexible situations?

(4) Another concern that is important yet easily addressed is the authors' use of the term "novel cell-type specific graph theory measures". Describing in the abstract and elsewhere the fact that what they mean is to take into account the sign of connections, not just their magnitude, would transmit to readers the essence of the contribution in a manner very simple to understand. Most readers would fail to grasp the essential point of the current labeling, which sounds potentially very vague and complex.

(5) Finally, the overall significance of the study, and advances over previous work, were not entirely clear. In the discussion, the authors identify three major findings: (1) WM function is shaped by the PV cell density gradient. But as above, further work is required to make it clear that this claim is supported by the model. (2) if local recurrent excitation is insufficient to generate persistent activity, then long-range recurrent excitation is needed to generate it. I had trouble understanding why a model was needed to reach this conclusion - it seems as if it is simply a question of straightforward logic. The discussion states that in this regard, the work here "offers specific predictions to be tested experimentally", but I had trouble identifying what these specific predictions are. (3) Taking into account sign, not only magnitude, of connections, is important. This last point once again seemed a matter of straightforward logic, making its novelty difficult to assess.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This paper uses the mouse mesoscale connectome, combined with data on the number and fraction of PV-type interneurons, to build a large-scale model of working memory activity in response to inputs from various sensory modalities. The key claims of the paper are two-fold. First, previous work has shown that there does not appear to be an increase in the number of excitatory inputs (spines) per pyramidal neuron along the cortical hierarchy (and this increase was previously suggested to underlie working memory activity occurring preferentially in higher areas along the cortical hierarchy). Thus, the claim is that a key alternative mechanism in the mouse is the heterogeneity in the fraction of PV interneurons. Second, the authors claim to develop novel cell type-specific graph theory.

I liked seeing the authors put all of the mouse connectomic information into a model to see how it behaved and expect that this will be useful to the community at large as a starting point for other researchers wishing to use and build upon such large-scale models. However, I have significant concerns about both primary scientific claims. With regard to the PV fraction, this does not look like a particularly robust result. First, it's a fairly weak result to start, much smaller than the simple effect of the location of an area along the cortical hierarchy (compare Figs. 2D, 2E; 3C, 3D). Second, the result seems to be heavily dependent upon having subdivided the somatosensory cortex into many separate points and focusing the main figures of the paper (and the only ones showing rates as a function of PV cell fraction) solely on simulations in which the sensory input is provided to the visual cortex. With regards to the claim of novel cell type-specific graph theory, there doesn't appear to be anything particularly novel. The authors simply make sure to assign negative rather than positive weights to inhibitory connections in their graph-theoretic analyses.

Major issues:<br /> 1) Weakness of result on effect of PV cell fraction. Comparing Figures 2D and 2E, or 3C and 3D, there is a very clear effect of cortical hierarchy on firing rate during the delay period in Figures 2D and 3C. However, in Figure 2E relating delay period firing rate to PV cell fraction, the result looks far weaker. (And similarly for Figs. 3C, 3D, with the latter result not even significant). Moreover, the PV cell fraction results are dominated by the zero firing rate brain regions (as opposed to being a nice graded set of rates, both for zeros and non-zeros, as with the cortical hierarchy results of Figures 2D), and these zeros are particularly contributed to by subdividing somatosensory (SS) into many subregions, thus contributing many points at the lower right of the graph.<br /> Further, it should be noted that Figure 2E is for visual inputs. In the supplementary Figure 2 - supplement 1, the authors do apply sensory inputs to auditory and somatosensory cortex...but then only show the result that the delay period firing rate increases along the cortical hierarchy (as in Figure 2D for the visual input), but strikingly omit the plots of firing rate versus PV cell fraction. This omission suggests that the result is even weaker for inputs to other sensory modalities, and thus difficult to justify as a defining principle.

2) Graph theoretic analyses. The main comparison made is between graph-theoretic quantities when the quantities account for or do not account for, PV cells contributing negative connection strengths. This did not seem particularly novel.

3) It was not clear to me how much the cell-type specific loop strength results were a result of having inhibitory cell types, versus were a result of the assumption ('counter-stream inhibitory bias') that there is a different ratio of excitation to inhibition in top-down versus bottom-up connections. It seems like the main results were more a function of this assumed asymmetry in top-down vs. bottom-up than it was a function of just using cell-type per se. That is, if one ignored inhibitory neurons but put in the top-down vs. bottom-up asymmetry, would one get the same basic results? And, likewise, if one didn't assume asymmetry in the excitatory vs. inhibitory connectivity in top-down versus bottom-up connections, but kept the Pyramidal and PV cell fraction data, would the basic result go away?

4) In the Discussion, there is a third 'main finding' claimed: "when local recurrent excitation is not sufficient to sustain persistent activity...distributed working memory must emerge from long-range interactions between parcellated areas". Isn't this essentially true by definition?

5) I don't know if it's even "CIB" that's important or just "any asymmetry (excitatory or inhibitory) between top-down vs. bottom-up directions along the hierarchy". This is worth clarifying and thinking more about, as assigning this to inhibition may be over-attributing a more basic need for asymmetry to a particular mechanism.

Other questions:<br /> 1) Is it really true that less than 2% of neurons are PV neurons for some areas? Are there higher fractions of other inhibitory interneuron types for these areas, and does this provide a confound for interpreting model results that don't include these other types?<br /> Maybe related to the above, the authors write in the Results that local excitation in the model is proportional to PV interneuron density. However, in the methods, it looks like there are two terms: a constant inhibition term and a term proportional to density. Maybe this former term was used to account for other cell types. Also, is local excitation in the model likewise proportional to pyramidal interneuron density (and, if not, why not?)?

2) Non-essential areas. The categorization of areas as 'non-essential' as opposed to, e.g. "inputs" is confusing. It seems like the main point is that, since the delay period activity as a whole is bistable, certain areas' contributions may be small enough that, alone, they can't flip the network between its bistable down and up states. However, this does not mean that such areas (such as the purple 'non-essential' area in Figure 5a) are 'non-essential' in the more common sense of the word. Rather, it seems that the purple area is just a 'weaker input' area, and it's confusing to thus label it as 'non-essential' (especially since I'd guess that, whether or not an area flips on/off the bistability may also depend on the assumed strength of the external input signal, i.e. if one made the labeled 'input area' a bit too weak to alone trigger the bistability, then the purple area might become 'essential' to cross the threshold for triggering a bistable-up state).

3) Relation between 'core areas' and loop strength. The measure underlying 'prediction accuracy = 0.93' in Figure 6D and the associated results seems incomplete by being unidirectional. It captures the direction: 'given high cell-type specific loop strength, then core area' but it does not capture the other direction: 'given a cell is part of a core area, is its predicted cell-type specific loop strength strong?'. It would be good to report statistics for both directions of association between loop strength and core area.

4) More justification would be useful on the assumption that the reticular nucleus provides tonic inhibition across the entire thalamus.

5) Is NMDA/AMPA ratio constant across areas and is this another difference between mice and monkeys? I am aware of early work in the mouse (Myme et al., J. Neurophys., 2003) suggesting no changes at least in comparing two brain regions' layer 2/3, but has more work been performed related to this?

6) Are bilateral connections between the left and right sides of a given area omitted and could those be important?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Combining dynamical modelling and recent findings of mouse brain anatomy, Ding et al. developed a cell-type-specific connectome-based dynamical model of the mouse brain underlying working memory. The authors find that there is a gradient across the cortex in terms of whether mnemonic information can be sustained persistently or only transiently, and this gradient is negatively correlated to the local density of parvalbumin (PV) positive inhibitory cells but positively correlated with mesoscale-defined cortical hierarchy. In addition, weighing connectivity strength by PV density at target areas provides a more faithful relationship between input strength and delay firing rate. The authors also investigate a model where cortical persistent activity can only be sustained with thalamus input intact, although this result is rather separate from the rest of the study. The authors then use this model to test the causal contributions of different areas to working memory. Although some of the in silico perturbations are consistent with existing experimental data, others are rather surprising and need to be further discussed. Finally, the authors investigate patterns of attractor states as a result of different local and long-range connections and suggest that distinct attractor states could underlie different task demands.

The importance of PV density as a predictor for working memory activity patterns in the mouse brain is in contrast to recent computational findings in the primate brain where the number of spines (excitatory synapses per pyramidal cell) is the key predictor. This finding reveals important species differences and provides complementary mechanisms that can shape distributed patterns of working memory representation across cortical regions. The method of biologically-based near-whole-brain dynamical modeling of a cognitive function is compelling, and the main conclusions are mostly well supported by evidence. However, some aspects of the method, result, and discussion need to be clarified and extended.

1. Based on existing anatomical data, the authors reveal a negative correlation between cortical hierarchy (defined by mesoscale connectivity; this concept needs to be explicitly defined in the Results session, not just in the Method section) and local PV density (Fig. 1). In the dynamical model, the authors find that working memory activity is positively (and strongly) correlated with cortical hierarchy and negatively (and less strongly) correlated with PV cell density (Fig. 2), and conclude that working memory activity depends on both. But could the negative correlation between activity and PV density simply result from the inherent relationship between hierarchy and PV density across regions? To strengthen this result, the authors should quantify the predictive power of local PV density on working memory activity beyond the predictive power of cortical hierarchy.

2. In Fig. 4, the authors find that cell-type-specific graph measures more accurately predict delay-period firing rates. Specifically, the authors weigh connections with a cell-type-projection coefficient, which is smaller when the PV cell fraction is higher in the target area. Considering that local PV cell fraction is already correlated with delay activity patterns, weighing the input with the same feature will naturally result in a better input-output relationship. This result will be strengthened if there is a more independent measure of cell-type-projection coefficient, such as the spine density of PV vs excitatory cells across regions, or even the percentage of inhibitory versus excitatory cells targeted by upstream region (even just for an example set of brain regions).

3. The authors aim to identify a core subnetwork that generates persistent activity across the cortex by characterising delay activity as well as the effects of perturbations during the stimulus and delay period. Consistent with existing data, the model identifies frontal areas and medial orbital areas as core areas. Surprisingly, areas such as the gustatory area are also part of the core areas. These more nuanced predictions from the model should be further discussed. Also surprisingly, the secondary motor cortex (MOs), which has been indicated as a core area for short-term memory and motor planning by many existing studies is classified as a readout area. The authors explain this potential discrepancy as a difference in task demand. The task used in this study is a visual delayed response task, and the task(s) used to support the role of MOs in short-term memory is usually a whisker-based delayed response task or an auditory delay response task. In all these tasks, activity in the delay period is likely a mixture of sensory memory, decision, and motor preparation signals. Therefore, task demand is unlikely the reason for this discrepancy. On the other hand, motor effectors (saccade, lick, reach, orient) could be a potential reason why some areas are recruited as part of the core working-memory network in one task and not in another task. The authors should further discuss both of these points.

4. As a non-expert in the field, it is rather difficult to grasp the relationship between the results in Fig. 7 and the rest of the paper. Are all the attractor states related to working memory? If so, why are the core regions for different attractor states so different? And are the core regions identified in Fig. 5 based on arbitrary parameters that happen to identify certain areas as core (PL)? The authors should at least further clarify the method used and discuss these results in the context of previous results in this study.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, Yadav and colleagues explore the metabolic changes associated with the regeneration of mechanosensory neurons in O-GlcNAc transferase (ogt-1) mutant worms. Using in vivo laser axotomy to assess the regeneration of individual mechanosensory neurons in C elegans, the authors discovered increased regeneration in ogt-1 mutant worms diverts enhanced glycolysis towards one-carbon metabolism and the downstream transsulfuration metabolic pathway. By genetically and pharmacologically disrupting one-carbon metabolism, they were able to abrogate this phenotype. Similar results were obtained by targeting the serine synthesis pathway. Furthermore, the authors tested downstream targets of this pathway and discovered that the vitamin B12 independent shunt pathway confers regeneration competence in these neurons. They also included RNA-Seq data to support the same conclusion. Ogt-1 mutants showed profound transcriptional changes in genes related to glycolysis and one-carbon metabolism. Perhaps more excitingly, supplementation of the methioninine in wild-type worms is sufficient to recapitulate the regenerative phenotype found in ogt-1 mutants.

I found these results convincing and novel. The experimental approach is elegant and the conclusions are robust. The supplemental data support the major points of the paper. The identification of specific metabolic pathways associated with axon growth and regeneration represents a significant contribution to the Neuroscience field. Interrogation of these data sets and pathways will certainly spark new exciting research in the years to come.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This is a potentially important finding regarding the roles of O-GlcNAc cycling and one-carbon metabolism in nerve regeneration. In a previous paper (Taub et al. 2018) they showed that both ogt-1 and oga-1 mutants show strong activation of a neuronal regeneration phenotype. However, the different biological processes used for the neural regeneration phenotype differed between the ogt-1 and oga-1 mutants. Several small issues emerge in the present paper which will increase the interest in the findings presented.

In summary, this paper under review is a potentially important finding which upon further documentation will be an excellent contribution.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Chaoming Wang and coauthors present a new framework for modeling neurons and networks of neurons, spanning a wide range of possible models from detailed (point-neuron) models with non-linear ion channel dynamics to more abstract rate neuron models. Models are defined in an object-oriented style, familiar to users of machine-learning frameworks like PyTorch, and are efficiently executed via the just-in-time compilation framework JAX/XLA. The programming paradigm naturally supports a hierarchical style, where e.g. a network is composed of neurons that contains ion channels; each of these components can be reused in different contexts and be simulated/analyzed individually.

Strengths:<br /> Brainpy's approach is an innovative application of state-of-the-art technology widely used in the machine learning community (auto-differentation, just-in-time compilation) to modeling in computational neuroscience and could provide a useful bridge between the two domains which overlap more and more. For researchers, describing, running, and optimizing their models in Python is very convenient. The use of Numba to write efficient operators for JAX/XLA is innovative and potentially very powerful.

The modeling framework is very flexible, where most types of models commonly used in computational neuroscience can be readily expressed.

The framework supports various integration algorithms for ODEs, SDEs, and FDEs, several additional convenience tools for model training, optimization, and analysis, as well as many pre-defined ion-channel, neuron, and synapse models. The wide range of included simulation and analysis tools and pre-defined models is impressive, and exceeds those offered by most competing software. The software comes with extensive documentation, tutorials, and examples, on par with that of existing simulators that have been around for much longer.

Weaknesses:<br /> While the article clearly outlines the strengths of the chosen approach, it lacks an equally clear exposition of its limitations and a more thorough comparison to established approaches. Two examples of limitations that should be stated more clearly, in my opinion: models need to be small enough to fit on a single machine (in contrast to e.g. NEURON and NEST which support distributed computation via MPI), and only single-compartment models are supported; both limitations are mentioned in passing in the discussion, but would merit a more upfront mention. Regarding the comparison to other approaches/simulators:<br /> 1) The study does not verify the accuracy of the presented framework. While its basic approach (time-step-based simulation, standard numerical integration algorithms) is sufficiently similar to other software to not expect major discrepancies, an explicit comparison would remove any doubt. Quantitative measures of accuracies are particularly important in the context of benchmarks (see below), since simulations can be made arbitrarily fast by sacrificing performance.<br /> 2) Benchmarking against other software is obviously important, but also full of potential pitfalls. The current article does not state clearly whether the results are strictly comparable. In particular: are the benchmarks on the different simulators calculating results to the same accuracy (use of single or double precision, same integration algorithm, etc.)? Does each simulator use the fastest possible execution mode (e.g. number of threads/processes for NEST, C++ standalone mode in Brian2, etc.)? What is exactly measured (compilation time, network generation time, simulation execution time, ...) - these components will scale differently with network size and simulation duration, so summing them up makes the results difficult to interpret. Details are also missing for the comparison between the XLA operator customization in C++ vs. Python: was the C++ variant written by the authors or by someone else? Does the NUMBA→XLA mechanism also support GPUs/TPUs? This comparison also seems to be missing from the GitHub repository provided for reproducing the paper results.<br /> 3) While the authors convincingly argue for the merits of their Python-based/object-oriented approach, in my opinion, they do not fully acknowledge the advantages of domain-specific languages (NMODL, NestML, equation syntax of ANNarchy and Brian2, ...). In particular, such languages aim at a strong decoupling of the mathematical model description from its implementation and other parts of the model. In contrast, models described with BrainPy's approach often need to refer to such details, e.g. be aware of differences between dense and sparse connectivity schemes, online, or batch mode, etc. It might also be worth mentioning descriptive approaches to synaptic connectivity as supported by other simulators (connection syntax in Brian2, Connection Set Algebra for NEST).

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This manuscript introduces an integrative framework for modelling and analysis in neuroscience called BrainPy. It describes the many tools and utilities for building a wide range of models with an accessible and extensible unified interface written in Python. Several illustrative examples are provided for common use cases, including how to extend the existing classes to incorporate new features, demonstrating its ease of use and adherence to Python's programming conventions for integrative modelling across multiple scales and paradigms. The provided benchmarks also demonstrate that despite the convenience of presenting a high-level interpreted language to the user, it provides orders of magnitude of computational speed-up relative to three popular alternative frameworks on the chosen simulations through the extensive use of several Just In Time compilers. Computational benchmarks are also provided to illustrate the speed-up gained from running the models on massively parallel processing hardware, including GPUs, suggesting leading computational performance across a wide range of use cases.

While the results presented are impressive, publishing further details of the benchmarks in an appendix would be helpful for evaluating the claims and the overall conclusion would be more convincing if the performance benefits were demonstrated on a wider selection of test cases. Unsatisfyingly, the authors gave up on making a direct comparison to Brian running on GPUs with GeNN which would have been a fairer comparison than CPU-based simulations. The code for the chosen benchmarks is also likely to be highly optimised by the authors for running on BrainPy but less so for the other platforms - a fairer test would be to invite the authors of the other simulators to optimise the same models and re-evaluate the benchmarks. Furthermore, the manuscript reads like an advertisement for the platform with very little discussion of its limitations, weaknesses, or directions for further improvement. A more frank and balanced perspective would strengthen the manuscript and give the reader greater confidence in the platform.

Since simulators wax and wane in popularity, it would be reassuring to see a roadmap for development with a proposed release cadence and a sustainable governance policy for the project. This would serve to both clearly indicate the areas of active development where community contributions would be most valuable and also to reassure potential users that the project is unlikely to be abandoned in the near future, ensuring that their time investment in learning to use the framework will not be wasted. Similarly, a complex set of dependencies, which need to be modified for BrainPy, will likely make the project hard to maintain and so a similar plan to those given for the CI pipeline and documentation generation for automation of these modifications would be a good addition. It is also important to periodically reflect on whether it still makes sense to combine all the disparate tools into one framework as the codebase grows and starts to strain under modifications required to maintain its unification.

Finally, a live demonstration would be a very useful addition to the project. For example, a Jupyter notebook hosted on mybinder.org or similar, and a fully configured Docker image, would each enable potential users to quickly experiment with BrainPy without having to install a stack of dependencies and troubleshoot version conflicts with their pre-existing setup. This would greatly lower the barrier to adoption and help to convince a larger base of modellers of the potential merits of BrainPy, which could be major, both in terms of the computational speed-up and ease of development for a wide range of modelling paradigms.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The paper presents the novel neuro-simulator BrainPy, which introduces several new concepts compared to existing simulators such as NEST, Brian, or GeNN: 1) a modular and Pythonic interface, which avoids having to use a fixed set of neural/synaptic models or using a textual equation-oriented interface; 2) a common platform for simulation, training, and analysis; 3) the use of just-in-time compilation using JAX/XLA, allowing to transparently access CPU, GPU, and TPU platforms. While none of these features is new per se (apart from TPU support, as far as I know), their combination provides an interesting new direction for the design of neuro-simulators.

Overall, BrainPy is a nice and valuable addition to the already overwhelming list of neuro-simulators, which all have their own advantages and drawbacks and are diversely maintained. The main strengths of BrainPy are 1) its multi-scale modular interface and 2) the possibility for the user to transparently use various hardware platforms for the simulation. The paper succeeds in explaining those two aspects in a convincing manner. The paper is also very didactic in explaining the different strengths and weaknesses of the current simulators, as well as the benefits of JIT compilation.

One potential issue is that the scope of the neuro-simulator is not very clearly explained and the target audience is not well defined: is BrainPy primarily intended for computational neuroscientists or for neuro-AI practitioners? The simulator offers very detailed neural models (HH, fractional order models), classical point-models (LIF, AdEx), rate-coded models (reservoirs), but also deep learning layers (Conv, MaxPool, BatchNorm, LSTM). Is there an advantage to using BrainPy rather than PyTorch for purely deep networks? Is it possible to build hybrid models combining rate-coded reservoirs or convnets with a network of HH neurons? Without such a hybrid approach, it is unclear why the deep learning layers are needed. In terms of plasticity, only external training procedures are implemented (backpropagation, FORCE, surrogate gradients). No local plasticity mechanism (Hebbian learning for rate-coded networks, STDP and its variants for spiking networks) seems to be implemented, apart from STP. Is it a planned feature? Appendix 8 refers to `bp.synplast.STDP()`, but it is not present in the current code (https://github.com/brainpy/BrainPy/tree/master/brainpy/_src/dyn/synplast). Spiking networks without STDP are not going to be very useful to computational neuroscientists, so this suggests that the simulator targets primarily neuro-AI, i.e. AI researchers interested in using spiking models in a machine learning approach. However, it is unclear why they would be interested in HH or Morris-Lecar models rather than simpler LIF neurons.

A second weakness of the paper concerns the demos and benchmarks used to demonstrate the versatility and performance of BrainPy, which are not sufficiently described. In Fig. 4, it is for example not explained how the reservoirs are trained (only the readout weights, or also the recurrent ones? Using BPTT only makes sense when the recurrent weights are also trained.), nor how many neurons they have, what the final performance is, etc. The comparison with NEURON, NEST, and Brian2 is hard to trust without detailed explanations. Why are different numbers of neurons used for COBA and COBAHH? How long is the simulation in each setting? Which time is measured: the total time including compilation and network creation, or just the simulation time? Are the same numerical methods used for all simulators? It would also be interesting to discuss why the only result involving TPUs (Fig 8c) shows that it is worse than the V100 GPU. What could be the reason? Are there biologically-realistic networks that would benefit from a TPU? As the support for TPUs is a major selling point of BrainPy, it would be important to investigate its usage further.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Due complicated and often unpredictable idiosyncratic differences, comparing fMRI topography between subjects typically would require extra expensive scan time and extra laborious analyzing steps to examine with specific functional localizer scan runs that contrast fMRI responses of every subject to different stimulus categories. To overcome this challenge, hyperaligning tools have recently been developed (e.g., Guntupalli et al., 2016; Haxby et al., 2011) based on aligning in a high-dimensional space of voxels of subjects' fMRI responses to watching a given movie. In the present study, Jiahui and colleagues propose a significantly improved version of hyperaligning functional brain topography between individuals. This new version, based on fMRI connectivity, works robustly on datasets when subjects watched different movies and were scanned with different parameters/scanners at different MRI centers.

Robustness is the major strength of this study. Despite the fact that datasets from different subjects watching different movies at different MRI centers with different scan parameters were used, the results of functional brain topography from between-subject hyperalignment based on fMRI connectivity were comparable to the golden standard of within-subject functional localizations, and significantly better than regular surface anatomical alignments. These results also support the claim that the present approach is a useful improvement from previous hyperalignments based on time-locked fMRI voxel responses, which would require normative samples of subjects watching a same movie.

Given the robustness, this new version of hyperalignment would provide much stronger statistical power for group-level comparisons with less costs of time and efforts to collect and analyze data from large sample size according to the current stringent standard, likely being useful to the whole research community of functional neuroimaging. That said, more discussions of the limit of the present hyperalignment approach would be helpful to potential readers. For example, to what extend the present hyperalignment approach would be applicable to individuals with atypical functional brain topography such as brain lesion patients with e.g., acquired prosopagnosia? Even in typical populations, while bilateral fusiform face areas can be identified in the majority through functional localizer scans, the left fusiform face area sometimes cannot be found. Moreover, many top-down factors are known to modulate functional brain topography. Due to these factors, brain responses and functional connectivity may be different even when a same subject watched a same movie twice (e.g., Cui et al., 2021).

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Guo and her colleagues develop a new approach to map the category-selective functional topographies in individual participants based on their movie-viewing fMRI data and functional localizer data from a normative sample. The connectivity hyperalignment are used to derived the transformation matrices between the participants according to their functional connectomes during movies watching. The transformation matrices are then used to project the localizer data from the normative sample into the new participant and create the idiosyncratic cortical topography for the participant. The authors demonstrate that a target participant's individualized category-selective topography can be accurately estimated using connectivity hyperalignment, regardless of whether different movies are used to calculate the connectome and regardless of other data collection parameters. The new approach allows researchers to estimate a broad range of functional topographies based on naturalistic movies and a normative database, making it possible to integrate datasets from laboratories worldwide to map functional areas for individuals. The topic is of broad interest for neuroimaging community; the rationale of the study is straightforward and the experiments were well designed; the results are comprehensive. I have some concerns that the authors may want to address, particularly on the details of the pipeline used to map individual category-selective functional topographies.

1. How does the length of the scan-length of movie-viewing fMRI affect the accuracy in predicting the idiosyncratic cortical topography? Similarly, how does the number of participants in the normative database affect the prediction of the category-selective topography? This information is important for the researchers who are interested in using the approach in their studies.<br /> 2. The data show that category-selective topography can be accurately estimated using connectivity hyperalignment, regardless of whether different movies are used to calculate the connectome and regardless of other data collection parameters. I'm wondering whether the functional connectome from resting state fMRI can do the same job as the movie-watching fMRI. If it is yes, it will expand the approach to broader data.<br /> 3. The authors averaged the hyper-aligned functional localizer data from all of subjects to predict individual category-selective topographies. As there are large spatial variability in the functional areas across subjects, averaging the data from many subjects may blur boundaries of the functional areas. A better solution might be to average those subjects who show highly similar connectome to the target subjects.<br /> 4. It is good to see that predictions made with hyperalignment were close to and sometimes even exceeded the reliability values measured by Cronbach's alpha. But, please clarify how the Cronbach's alpha is calculated.<br /> 5. Which algorithm was used to perform surface-based anatomical alignment? Can the state-of-the-art Multimodal Surface Matching (MSM) algorithm from HCP achieve better performance?<br /> 6. Is it necessary to project to the time course of the functional localizer from the normative sample into the new participants? Does it work if we just project the contrast maps from the normative samples to the new subjects?<br /> 7. Saygin and her colleagues have demonstrated that structural connectivity fingerprints can predict cortical selectivity for multiple visual categories across cortex (Osher DE et al, 2016, Cerebral Cortex; Saygin et al, 2011, Nat. Neurosci). I think there's a connection between those studies and the current study. If the author can discuss the connection between them, it may help us understand why CHA work so well.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

In this paper, Jiahui and colleagues propose a new method for learning individual-specific functional resonance imaging (fMRI) patterns from naturalistic stimuli, extending existing hyperalignment methods. They evaluate this method - enhanced connectivity hyperalignment (CHA) - across four datasets, each comprising between nine (Raiders) and twenty (Budapest, Sraiders) participants.

The work promises to address a significant need in existing functional alignment methods: while hyperalignment and related methods have been increasingly used in the field to compare participants scanned with overlapping stimuli (or lack thereof, in the case of resting state data), their use remains largely tied to naturalistic stimuli. In this case, having non-overlapping stimuli is a significant constraint on application, as many researchers may have access to only partially overlapping stimuli or wish to compare stimuli acquired under different protocols and at different sites.

It is surprising, however, that the authors do not cite a paper that has already successfully demonstrated a functional alignment method that can address exactly this need: a connectivity-based Shared Response Model (cSRM; Nastase et al., 2020, NeuroImage). It would be relevant for the authors to consider the cSRM method in relation to their enhanced CHA method in detail. In particular, both the relative predictive performance as well as associated computational costs would be useful for researchers to understand in considering enhanced CHA for their applications.

With this in mind, I noted several current weaknesses in the paper:

First, while the enhanced CHA method is a promising update on existing CHA techniques, it is unclear why this particular six step, iterative approach was adopted. That is: why was six steps chosen over any other number? At present, it is not clear if there is an explicit loss function that the authors are minimizing over their iterations. The relative computational cost of six iterations is also likely significant, particularly compared to previous hyperalignment algorithms. A more detailed theoretical understanding of why six iterations are necessary-or if other researchers could adopt a variable number according to the characteristics of their data-would significantly improve the transferability of this method.

Second, the existing evaluations for enhanced CHA appear to be entirely based on image-derived correlations. That is, the authors compare the predicted image from CHA with the ground-truth image using correlation. While this provides promising initial evidence, correlation-based measures are often difficult to interpret given their sensitivity to image characteristics such as smoothness. Including Cronbach's alpha reliability as a baseline does not address this concern, as it is similarly an image-based statistic. It would be useful to see additional predictive experiments using frameworks such as time-segment classification, inter-subject decoding, or encoding models.

Addressing these concerns and considering cSRM as a comparison model would significantly strengthen the paper. There are also notable strengths that I would encourage the authors to further pursue. In particular, the authors have access to a unique dataset in which the same Raiders of the Lost Ark stimulus was scanned for participants within the Budapest (SRaiders) dataset as well as non-overlapping participants in the Raiders dataset. Exploring the relative performance for cross-movie prediction within a dataset as compared to a shared movie prediction across datasets is particularly interesting for methods development. I would encourage the authors to explicitly report results in this framework to highlight both this unique testing structure as well as the performance of their enhanced CHA method.

Overall, I share the authors' enthusiasm for the potential of cross-movie, cross-dataset prediction, and I believe that methods such as enhanced CHA are likely to significantly improve our ability to make these comparisons in the near future. At present, however, I find that the theoretical and experimental support for enhanced CHA is incomplete. It is therefore difficult to assess how enhanced CHA meets its goals or how successfully other researchers would be able to adopt this method in their own experiments.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Variants in the UBA5 gene are associated with rare developmental and epileptic encephalopathy, DEE44. This research developed a system to assess in vivo and in vitro genotype-phenotype relationships between UBA5 allele series by humanized UBA5 fly models and biochemical activity assays. This study provides a basis for evaluating current and future individuals afflicted with this rare disease.

Strengths:<br /> The authors developed a method to measure the enzymatic reaction activity of UBA5 mutants over time by applying the UbiReal method, which can monitor each reaction step of ubiquitination in real time using fluorescence polarization. They also classified fruit fly carrying humanized UBA5 variants into groups based on phenotype. They found a correlation between biochemical UBA5 activity and phenotype severity.

Weaknesses:<br /> In the case of human DEE44, compound heterozygotes with both loss-of-function and hypomorphic forms (e.g., p.Ala371Thr, p.Asp389Gly, p.Asp389Tyr) may cause disease states. The presented models have failed to evaluate such cases.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this study, the authors generate a Drosophila model to assess disease-linked allelic variants in the UBA5 gene. In humans, variants in UBA5 have been associated with DEE44, characterized by developmental delay, seizures, and encephalopathy. Here, the authors set out to characterize the relationship between 12 disease-linked variants in UBA5 using a variety of assays in their Drosophila Uba5 model. They first show that human UBA5 can substitute all essential functions of the Drosophila Uba5 ortholog, and then assess phenotypes in flies expressing the various disease variants. Using these assays, the authors classify the alleles into mild, intermediate, and severe loss-of-function alleles. Further, the authors establish several important in vitro assays to determine the impacts of the disease alleles on Uba5 stability and function. Together, they find a relatively close correlation between in vivo and in vitro relationships between Uba5 alleles and establish a new Drosophila model to probe the etiology of Uba5-related disorders.

Strengths:<br /> Overall, this is a convincing and well-executed study. There is clearly a need to assess disease-associated allelic variants to better understand human disorders, particularly for rare diseases, and this humanized fly model of Uba5 is a powerful system to rapidly evaluate variants and relationships to various phenotypes. The manuscript is well written, and the experiments are appropriately controlled.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Relative simplicity and genetic accessibility of the fly brain makes it a premier model system for studying the function of genes linked to various diseases in humans. Here, Pan et al. show that human UBA5, whose mutations cause developmental and epileptic encephalopathy, can functionally replace the fly homolog Uba5. The authors then systematically express in flies the different versions of the gene carrying clinically relevant SNPs and perform extensive phenotypic characterization such as survival rate, developmental timing, lifespan, locomotor and seizure activity, as well as in vitro biochemical characterization (stability, ATP binding, UFM-1 activation) of the corresponding recombinant proteins. The biochemical effects are well predicted by (or at least consistent with) the location of affected amino acids in the previously described Uba5 protein structure. Most strikingly, the severity of biochemical defects appears to closely track the severity of phenotypic defects observed in vivo in flies. While the paper does not provide many novel insights into the function of Uba5, it convincingly establishes the fly nervous system as a powerful model for future mechanistic studies.

One potential limitation is the design of the expression system in this work. Even though the authors state (ln. 127-128) that "human cDNA is expressed under the control of the endogenous Uba5 enhancer and promoter", it is in fact the Gal4 gene that is expressed from the endogenous locus (which authors also note in the same paragraph 138-139), meaning that the cDNA expression level would inevitably be amplified in comparison. While I do not think this weakens the conclusions of this paper, it may impact the interpretation of future experiments that use these tools. Especially considering the authors argue that most disease variants of UBA5 are partial loss-of-functions, the amplification effect could potentially mask the phenotypes of milder hypomorphic alleles. Temperature sensitivity of Gal4 expression may allow calibrating levels to reduce the impact of this amplification, but the revised manuscript still does not openly acknowledge or discuss this potential caveat.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The revised manuscript new presented 1) a permutation-based test for the significance of the overlap between DEGs and genes with positive selection signals in Tibetans, and 2) polygenic adaptation test for the eQTLs. I make my suggestions in detail as below:

Major Comments

1. My previous concern regarding the DEG analysis remains unresolved. Although the authors agreed in their response that the difference between the male- and female-specific DEGs are insufficient to the difference between sex-combined and sex-specific DEGs (Figure S6). However, the results section still states the opposite pattern between males and females as a decisive reason for the difference (p. 9, lines 236-239). Again, I would like to recommend the authors to test alternative ways of analysis to boost statistical power for DEG detection other than simply splitting data into males and females and performing analysis in each subset. For example, the authors may consider utilizing gene by environment interaction analysis schemes here biological sex as an environmental factor.

2. Multiple testing schemes are still sub-optimal in some cases. Most of all, the p-values in the WGCNA analysis (p. 11), the authors corrected for the number of traits (n=12) after adjusting for the correlation between them. However, they did not mention whether they counted for the number of modules they tested at all (n=136 and 161 for males and females, respectively). Whether they account for the number of modules will make a substantial difference in the significance threshold, please incorporate and describe a proper multiple testing scheme for this analysis.

3. Evidence for natural selection on the observed DEG pattern is still weak and not properly described.<br /> 1) For the overlap between DEGs and TSNGs, the authors introduced a permutation-based test, but used a total set of genes in the human genome as a comparison set (p. 25, lines 699-700). I believe that the authors should sample random sets of genes from those already expressed in each tissue to make a fair comparison.<br /> 2) The entire polygraph analysis for polygenic adaptation is poorly described. The current version of the Methods does not clarify i) for which genes the eQTLs are discovered, 2) how the authors performed the eQTL analysis, iii) how the authors polarized the effect, and iv) how they set up a comparison between the eQTLs and the others.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

More than 80 million people live at high altitude. This impacts health outcomes, including those related to pregnancy. Longer-lived populations at high altitudes, such as the Tibetan and Andean populations show partial protection against the negative health effects of high altitude. The paper by Yue sought to determine the mechanisms by which the placenta of Tibetans may have adapted to minimise the negative effect of high altitude on fetal growth outcomes. It compared placentas from pregnancies from Tibetans to those from the Han Chinese. It employed RNAseq profiling of different regions of the placenta and fetal membranes, with some follow-up of histological changes in umbilical cord structure and placental structure. The study also explored the contribution of fetal sex in these phenotypic outcomes.

A key strength of the study is the large sample sizes for the RNAseq analysis, the analysis of different parts of the placenta and fetal membranes, and the assessment of fetal sex differences.

A main weakness is that this study, and its conclusions, largely rely on transcriptomic changes informed by RNAseq. Changes in genes and pathways identified through bioinformatic analysis were not verified by alternate methods, such as by western blotting, which would add weight to the strength of the data and its interpretations. There is also a lack of description of patient characteristics, so the reader is unable to make their own judgments on how placental changes may link to pregnancy outcomes. Another weakness is that the histological analyses were performed on n=5 per group and were rudimentary in nature.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Impairment in hand function is a challenge for stroke rehabilitation, and its neural underpinnings are of paramount importance for the field of biomedical science and neuroscience. The present study uses a novel finger force measurement device to measure individual fingers' force production in three dimensions when one finger is needed to produce an independent isometric force. Enslavement, i.e., the unwanted coactivation of non-intended fingers, is exaggerated in stroke survivors. The study started out by noting that the contribution of underlying factors (the loss of corticospinal drive, intrusion of flexor synergy due to a loss of regulation on subcortical pathways, and/or biomechanical changes) is not well understood. Detailed analysis for the inter-dependence between finger forces shows that the covariation between finger forces showed stroke-specific changes in shape and magnitudes, and these changes are not caused by biomechanical constraints. The important message that the study tries to convey is that the magnitude change in finger coactivation of the paretic hand is caused by the two dissociable factors, i.e., a loss of complexity in finger control and an intrusion of flexor bias. 

Strengths:<br /> The targeted topic of individual control of fingers for stroke survivors is of both theoretical and applied importance. The methodology of using isometric finger force to fulfill simple yet relevant motor tasks for stroke patients is also novel and sound. The paper is concisely written with excellent figures.

Weaknesses:<br /> I have three major concerns about the study: 1) the link between the analysis results and two of the study's main conclusions is weak, specifically for the conclusion that a loss of complexity in finger control and the intrusion of flexor bias is dissociable. 2) using hand posture measures to quantify the influence of biomechanical factors in stroke patients is not well justified. 3) only a limited number of stroke patients were recruited (n=13). <br /> <br /> First, the conclusion that the two factors contributing to the magnitude of finger covariation pattern are dissociable is not well reasoned. For example, the reasoning is clearly stated (Line 434) as: "Given the above converging evidence that Angular Distance is a measure of complexity of the geometric shape of finger coactivation, whereas Euclidean Distance is more sensitive to the magnitude change of these patterns across task goals if the two factors are dissociable, the intrusion of flexor bias would predict the magnitude (Euclidean Distances), but not the shape (Angular Distances) of the enslavement patterns. "

The logic behind this statement is unclear. Suppose the "two factors" are the complexity loss (shown by Angular Distance) and intrusion of flexor bias (shown by Bias). In that case, we cannot just use the predictability and the lack of predictability of the measure of intrusion of flexor bias (Bias) to reach the above conclusion, i.e., the Bias (for the intrusion of flexor bias) and changes in Angular Distance (for the loss of complex loss) is dissociable. Why not just test the association between Bias and Angular Distance directly?

Another conclusion is that the changes of Euclidian Distance and Angular Distance from the pattern similarity analysis of finger coactivation patterns inform us that the coactivation shape is preserved but its magnitude is increased in the paretic hand. However, the shape measure (Angular Distance) shows a decrease in paretic hands, indicating the coactivations for different task requirements become similar in the paretic hand. It becomes similar across task conditions, but this does not mean the coactivation shape for each task requirement is preserved in patients. In fact, one possible sign of reservation might be an unchanged function of distance measure (varied by intended fingers or directions) between groups (ideally shown in the format as Figure 5B). As we can see from the figure, the shape is preserved in the mild group but not so in the severe group if we compare the data between groups. Statistically, it is better to do ANOVA and use the group*fingers and group*directions interaction to show the reservation of "shape." The same logic applies to the Euclidean Distance measure (Figure 7B and 7D). Again, the connection between data analysis results and conclusions should be clarified. <br /> <br /> Second, the use of hand posture measures to quantify biomechanical factors for hand impairments is not validated.  

Based on two hand posture measures, the study rules out the contribution of biomechanical factors for enslavement in patients entirely (Line 390). However, the alternative explanation for the negative effect of posture variables is that these two specific variables (Mount Distance and Angle) might not reflect the postural changes (and biomechanical factors in hand function) in patients. Note these two measures are not about the resting hand posture of the patient, which is often affected. It is the posture when the hand is inserted into the apparatus, and the total force readings are minimal. The force readings would be quite small if people are good at relaxing their muscles and inhibiting unwanted reflexes in a specific posture. Healthy hands can remain a small force for rather different postures. Thus, healthy hands can produce a range of possible minimum-force postures, making the reliability of these "minimum" posture measures questionable. For patients, on the other hand, since a minimum-force posture is related to the ability to relax the muscles, it probably reflects both biomechanical changes (muscles and tendons, etc.) and subcortical influence. Thus, using these two measures to rule out the possibility of biomechanical factors needs further justification. <br /> <br /> Third, the number of stroke patients is limited (n=13), especially when one important test is to compare the mild group and the moderate-severe subgroups. The group comparison thus has small statistical power with a medium split. <br /> <br /> As the study aims to tease out the contributions of biomechanical, subcortical, and cortical input to the observed impairment of enslavement, we need to be careful about whether the selected behavioral variables are justified to reflect these factors and whether the data analysis results coherently support the conclusions. As it currently stands, the paper still has room to improve to achieve its aims.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This study addresses the factors affecting the loss of independent control of finger forces after stroke. As central and peripheral factors contribute to this impairment, the authors used a novel apparatus and task to rigorously quantify the specific features of loss of finger individuation across all digits. The analyses ruled out the role of biomechanical constraints and revealed that the loss of independent control of finger forces is primarily driven by the interaction of two factors: loss of complexity in finger control (shape of enslavement patterns) and involuntary coactivations of task-irrelevant fingers (flexion bias).

Strengths:<br /> 1. The device and 3D finger individuation task are major strengths of the study, setting this work apart from previous work and enabling novel insights.<br /> 2. The analyses are thorough and well-designed. Of particular value is the analysis of finger force control in 3D Cartesian space and the use of Representational Similarity Analysis of finger enslavement pattern magnitude and shape.<br /> 3. A major contribution of this work is the teasing out of the effects of top-down factors versus biomechanical constraints affecting impairment of finger force control.<br /> 4. I found the discussion about complexity of finger control (lines 541-553) very interesting. The topic of adaptability of finger coactivation patterns in the context of dexterous manipulation is a key topic in robotics and neuroscience. In robotics, finger forces are decomposed into a grasp and manipulation component. In human motor control studies, this approach has identified their temporal coordination (work by Latash and Zatsiorsky, e.g., Gao et al., 2005) and potentially distinct sensorimotor control mechanisms (Wu and Santello, 2023). The authors might wish to discuss how coactivation patterns might contribute to the coordination of grasp and manipulation forces.

Weaknesses:<br /> None (only minor clarifications, e.g., the term biomechanical constraints should be defined earlier in the paper).

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This paper seeks to characterize finger enslavement impairment after stroke-"the unwanted coactivation of non-intended fingers in individuated finger movements." In the past, three possible neuromuscular mechanisms contributing to finger enslavement were suggested: passive musculotendon properties, an intrusion of flexor bias, and a loss of complexity in finger control repertoire. To tease apart these factors, the authors simultaneously recorded all five fingertip forces using a sensitive isometric force measurement device, which allowed characterizing patterns of enslavement for all fingers in a variety of instructed tasks. This novel experimental design opened new opportunities to study finger enslavement in more detail. To analyze this multi-dimensional dataset, new metrics were introduced, and many detailed analyses were conducted. Here is a brief account of the important results as best as I can summarize them.

1. Gross finger individuation ability is lower in the paretic hand of stroke patients than in non-paretic or healthy hands. Enslavement worsens with the severity of overall stroke impairment.<br /> 2. The enslavement patterns - unintended finger forces as functions of an instructed force in a different finger - show smaller "complexity" in paretic than nonparetic hands. I.e., the directions of unintended finger forces in the paretic hand remain similar across various instructed tasks. This reduced complexity also correlates with the severity of stroke.<br /> 3. The enslavement patterns show larger magnitude differences in the paretic than non-paretic hands; i.e., the unintended fingers' forces show a larger shift when comparing two instructed force directions in a paretic finger.<br /> 4. Finger force biases exist in paretic and non-paretic hands and correlate with the severity of stroke. Biases are more pronounced in flexion than ab/adduction direction.<br /> 5. The resting hand posture does not correlate with finger force bias or enslavement patterns.<br /> 6. Finger force biases correlate with enslavement patterns in the paretic hand, but not in the non-paretic hand.<br /> 7. Flexor bias (force biases in flexor direction) does not correlate with gross individuation ability in the ab/adduction direction in the non-paretic hand, but it correlates with the ab/adduction individuation ability in the paretic hand.<br /> 8. Finger force biases do not correlate with directional differences in enslavement patterns on either hand. However, biases correlate with the magnitude of force shift in the enslavement pattern.<br /> 9. The intrusion of flexor bias (difference of finger force biases in paretic and non-paretic hands) does not correlate with directional differences in enslavement patterns in either hand, but it correlates with force shifts in enslavement patterns in both hands.<br /> 10. More principal components (in principal component analysis, PCA) are required to explain similar levels of variance of enslavement patterns in paretic than non-paretic hands.

Taken together, the authors use these results to claim that: 1) enslavement impairment is unrelated to passive biomechanical properties, and 2) loss of complexity and flexor bias both contribute to enslavement, but possibly via different mechanisms.

The first argument is supported by the result that resting hand posture does not explain gross individuation ability or enslavement patterns. Although these results are valid, biomechanical contributions are not ruled out altogether in my opinion. The experiment starts from the optimal posture in which minimal finger forces are recorded in a relaxed state, essentially an "equilibrium" posture where all forces from muscles, ligaments, and other soft tissues are balanced. However, this equilibrium posture alone does not represent potential asymmetry in passive biomechanical properties (e.g., at equilibrium, flexion may face less stiffness than extension), nor does it take into account complex interactions between muscles of the hand. A simple finger force requires the co-activation of several intrinsic and extrinsic hand muscles as well as those of the wrist, some of which may be weak, shortened, stiff, painful, etc. Even if neural activity is present, compensation from other muscles may be needed, which may lead to unintended forces in other fingers. Although my "hunch" agrees with the author's claim that neural contributions outweigh biomechanical factors in enslavement, I believe resting posture on its own cannot account for "all" biomechanical factors. Additionally, the results comparing biases in paretic and non-paretic hands (line 389) are unrelated to biomechanics. It is reasonable to believe that the passive biomechanical properties of the paretic hand are different from those of the non-paretic hand if long enough time has passed since the stroke. So biomechanical of one hand is not representative of the other hand. Even if biases in the non-paretic hand could explain those in the paretic hand, I find it hard to extend the conclusion that biomechanics is a factor.

The authors further presented detailed analyses to tease apart contributions of flexor bias and loss of complexity to enslavement. The flexor bias is straightforward to define, and its correlation with enslavement (or the absence of correlation in the non-paretic hand) is supported by the results. However, the arguments about complexity are less straightforward. Two separate definitions of complexity are used: one is the directional differences between enslavement patterns, and the other is based on the number of principal components. This is one source of confusion as to which definition is used when referring to "loss of complexity". Nonetheless, both complexities are shown to decrease with the severity of stroke. The first type of complexity is also shown to be uncorrelated to flexor bias. However, I did not find evidence among the results that directly linked complexity to enslavement. Could complexity, similar to biomechanical properties, be ruled out? This paper provides no evidence for or against the contribution of complexity to enslavement.

My last point is about the neural correlates of these characteristics. The authors frequently use the terms "low-level", "subcortical", "top-down cortical", etc. throughout the paper, while the results are exclusively at a behavioral level. This issue is also present in the abstract where the authors state that: "we aim to tease apart the contributions of lower biomechanical, subcortical constraints, and top-down cortical control to these patterns in both healthy and stroke hands"; however, the methods and the results are unrelated to neural aspects of control, and the authors only refer to other studied to link these behavioral effects to "potential" neural causes. Further, the intrusion of flexor bias is usually associated with "subcortical" neural pathways in Results. The authors have properly discussed these possible neural correlates in the Discussion, but mentioning these terms in the Results is unjustified and unsupported by the results or the methods. This paper does not provide any standalone evidence to directly link complexity or bias to their neural correlates.

Comments on the representational distance matrices (RDM):<br /> Two types of RDM were defined: "by-Finger" RDM (Fig 4A), and "by-Target Direction" RDM (Fig 4D). While I understand the by-Finger RDM and it physically makes sense to me, I cannot fully wrap my head around the by-Target RDM. I leave the interpretation of these results to the reader.

The distinction between the Euclidean and Angular distance is also vague to me. Angular distance is a valid similarity measure for the directions of two vectors and it is unrelated to the norms of vectors. However, Euclidean distance is not fully independent of the Angular distance as the authors claim; it changes with both the norms of the two vectors and the angle between them. If the angular distance is small, then Euclidian distance mostly represents norm differences, but the statement "Euclidean distances are sensitive to the length difference between two force vectors but insensitive to direction differences" is not generally correct. This issue is particularly important because the averaging of distances (see my next point) masks details of individual distance values, which hinders the interpretation of the results.

The enslavement patterns and RDMs are potentially valuable metrics, however, the way they are condensed in the final statistical analyses reduces their value. The way I understand it, all elements of the RDM matrix are averaged into a single value. This averaging masks the details of individual pairs of comparisons, which not only reduces the information resolution but also seriously hinders rigorous analysis and interpretation of the results.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

In this study, the authors investigate the effects of Notch pathway inactivation on the termination of Drosophila neuroblasts at the end of development. They find that termination is delayed, while temporal patterning progression is slowed down. Forcing temporal patterning progression in a Notch pathway mutant restores correct timing of neuroblast elimination. Finally they show that Imp, an early temporal patterning factor promotes Delta expression in neuroblast lineages. This indicates that feedback loops between temporal patterning and lineage-intrinsic Notch activity fine tunes timing of early to late temporal transitions and is important to schedule NB termination at the end of development.

The study adds another layer of regulation that finetunes temporal progression in Drosophila neural stem cells. This mechanism appears to be mainly lineage intrinsic - Delta being expressed from NBs and their progeny, but also partly niche-mediated - Delta being also expressed in glia but with a minor influence. Together with a recent study (PMID: 36040415), this work suggests that Notch signaling is a key player in promoting temporal progression in various temporal patterning system. As such it is of broad interest for the neuro-developmental community.

Strengths<br /> The data are based on genetic experiments which are clearly described and mostly convincing. The study is interesting, adding another layer of regulation that finetunes temporal progression in Drosophila neural stem cells. This mechanism appears to be mainly lineage intrinsic - Delta being expressed from NBs and their progeny, but also partly niche-mediated - Delta being also expressed in glia but with a minor influence. A similar mechanism has been recently described, although in a different temporal patterning system (medulla neuroblasts of the optic lobe - PMID: 36040415). It is overall of broad interest for the neuro-developmental community.

Weaknesses<br /> The mechanisms by which Notch signaling regulates temporal patterning progression are not investigated in details. For example, it is not clear whether Notch signaling directly regulates temporal patterning genes, or whether the phenotypes observed are indirect (for example through the regulation of the cell-cycle speed). The authors could have investigated whether temporal patterning genes are directly regulated by the Notch pathway via ChIP-seq of Su(H) or the identification of potential binding sites for Su(H) in enhancers. A similar approach has been recently undertaken by the lab of Dr Xin Li, to show that Notch signaling regulates sequential expression of temporal patterning factors in optic lobes neuroblasts (PMID: 36040415), which exhibit a different temporal patterning system than central brain neuroblasts in the present study. As such, the mechanistic insights of the study are limited.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, the authors are building on their previous work showing Delta-Notch regulates the entrance and exit from embryo-larval quiescence of neural stem cells of the central brain (called CB neuroblasts (NB) (PMID: 35112131)). Here they show that continuous depletion of Notch in NBs from early embryogenesis leads to cycling NBs in the adult. This - cycling NBs in the adult - is not seen in controls. The assumption here is that these Notch-RNAi NBs in adults are those that did not undergo terminal differentiation in pupal development. The authors show that Notch is activated by its ligand Delta which is expressed on the GMC daughter cell and on cortex glia. They determine that the temporal requirement for Notch activity is 0-72 hours after larval hatching (ALH) (i.e., 1st instar through mid-3rd instar at 25C). In NBs/GMCs depleted for Notch, early temporal markers were still expressed at time points when they should be off and late markers were delayed in expression. These effects were observed in ~20-40% of NBs (Figures 5 and 6). Through mining existing data sets, they found that the early temporal factor Imp - an RNA binding protein - can bind Delta mRNA. They show that Delta transcripts decrease over time, leading to the hypothesis that Delta mRNA is repressed by the late temporal factors. Over-expressing late factors Syp or E93 earlier in development leads to downregulation of a Delta::GFP protein trap. These results lead to a model in which Notch regulates expression of early temporal factors and early temporal factors regulate Notch activity through translation of Delta mRNA.

There are several strengths of this study and no major weaknesses. The authors report rigorous measurements and statistical analyses throughout the study. Their conclusions are appropriate for the results. Data mining revealed an important mechanism - that Imp binds Delta mRNA - supporting the model that that early temporal factors promote Delta expression, which in turn promotes Notch signaling.

An appraisal: The authors use temperature shifts with Gal80TS to show that Notch is required between 0-72 hours ALH. They show with the use of known markers of the temporal factors and Delta protein trap, that Imp promotes Delta protein expression and the later temporal factors reduce Delta, although the molecular mechanisms are not clearly delineated. Overall, these data support their model that the reduction of Delta expression during larval development leads to a loss of Notch activity.

As noted in the Discussion, this study raises many questions about what Notch does in larval CB NBs. For example, does it inhibit Castor or Imp? Is Notch required in certain neural lineages and not others. These studies will be of interest in the community of developmental neurobiologists.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

As I indicated in the initial review, the experiments are well conceived and executed, and the data are clear. I also agree with the authors that this work represents a key first step toward understanding how Notch signaling contributes to temporal control of fly neuroblasts. It is my opinion that the authors fall short of demonstrating how Notch signaling and temporal identity genes at the chromatin levels. I find this disappointing given the availability of various tools for looking at dynamic regulation of gene activity at high resolution. Given these weaknesses, my opinion is that the study is descriptive and lacks mechanistic explanation.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The author studies a family of models for heritable epigenetic information, with a focus on enumerating and classifying different possible architectures. The key aspects of the paper are:

- Enumerate all 'heritable' architectures for up to 4 constituents.<br /> - A study of whether permanent ("genetic") or transient ("epigenetic") perturbations lead to heritable changes.<br /> - Enumerated the connectivity of the "sequence space" formed by these heritable architectures.<br /> - Incorporating stochasticity, the authors explore stability to noise (transient perturbations).<br /> - A connection is made with experimental results on C elegans.

The study is timely, as there has been a renewed interest in the last decade in non-genetic, heritable heterogeneity (e.g., from single-cell transcriptomics). Consequently, there is a need for a theoretical understanding of the constraints on such systems. There are some excellent aspects of this study: for instance:

- the attention paid to how one architecture "mutates" into another, establishing the analogue of a "sequence space" for network motifs (Fig 3).<br /> - the distinction is drawn between permanent ("genetic") and transient ("epigenetic") perturbations that can lead to heritable changes.<br /> - the interplay between development, generational timescales, and physiological time (as in Fig. 5).

The manuscript would be very interesting if it focused on explaining and expanding these results. Unfortunately, as a whole, it does not succeed in formalising nor addressing any particular open questions in the field. Aside from issues in presentation and modelling choices (detailed below), it would benefit greatly from a more systematic approach rather than the vignettes presented.

## Terminology<br /> The author introduces a terminology for networks of interacting species in terms of "entities" and "sensors" -- the former being nodes of a graph, and the latter being those nodes that receive inputs from other nodes. In the language of directed graphs, "entities" would seem to correspond to vertices, and "sensors" those vertices with positive indegree and outdegree. Unfortunately, the added benefit of redefining accepted terminology from the study of graphs and networks is not clear.

## Heritability<br /> The primary goal of the paper is to analyse the properties of those networks that constitute "heritable regulatory architectures". The definition of heritability is not clearly stated anywhere in the paper, but it appears to be that the steady-state of the network must have a non-zero expression of every entity. As this is the heart of the paper, it would be good to have the definition of heritable laid out clearly in either the main text or the SI.

## Model<br /> As described in the supplementary, but not in the main text, the author first chooses to endow these networks with simple linear dynamics; something like $\partial_t \vec{x} = A x - T x$, where the vector $x$ is the expression level of each entity, $A$ has the structure of the adjacency matrix of the directed graph, and $T$ is a diagonal matrix with positive entries that determines the degradation or dilution rate of each entity. From a readability standpoint, it would greatly aid the reader if the long list of equations in the SI were replaced with the simple rule that takes one from a network diagram to a set of ODEs.

The implementation of negative regulation is manifestly unphysical if the "entities" represent the expression level of, say, gene products. For instance, in regulatory network E, the value of the variable z can go negative (for instance, if the system starts with z= and y=0, and x > 0).

The model seems to suddenly change from Figure 4 onwards. While the results presented here have at least some attempt at classification or statistical rigour (i.e. Fig 4 D), there are suddenly three values associated with each entity ("property step, active fraction, and number"). Furthermore, the system suddenly appears to be stochastic. The reader is left unsure of what has happened, especially after having made the effort to deduce the model as it was in Figs 1 through 3. No respite is to be found in the SI, either, where this new stochastic model should have been described in sufficient detail to allow one to reproduce the simulation.

## Perturbations<br /> Inspired especially by experimental manipulations such as RNAi or mutagenesis, the author studies whether such perturbations can lead to a heritable change in network output. While this is naturally the case for permanent changes (such as mutagenesis), the author gives convincing examples of cases in which transient perturbations lead to heritable changes. Presumably, this is due the the underlying mutlistability of many networks, in which a perturbation can pop the system from one attractor to another.

Unfortunately, there appears to be no attempt at a systematic study of outcomes, nor a classification of when a particular behaviour is to be expected. Instead, there is a long and difficult-to-read description of numerical results that appear to have been sampled at random (in terms of both the architecture and parameter regime chosen). The main result here appears to be that "genetic" (permanent) and "epigenetic" (transient) perturbations can differ from each other -- and that architectures that share a response to genetic perturbation need not behave the same under an epigenetic one. This is neither surprising (in which case even illustrative evidence would have sufficed) nor is it explored with statistical or combinatorial rigour (e.g. how easy is it to mistake one architecture for another? What fraction share a response to a particular perturbation?)

As an additional comment, many of the results here are presented as depending on the topology of the network. However, each network is specified by many kinetic constants, and there is no attempt to consider the robustness of results to changes in parameters.

## DNA analogy<br /> At two points, the author makes a comparison between genetic information (i.e. DNA) and epigenetic information as determined by these heritable regulatory architectures. The two claims the author makes are that (i) heritable architectures are capable of transmitting "more heritable information" than genetic sequences, and (ii) that, unlike DNA, the connectivity (in the sense of mutations) between heritable architectures is sparse and uneven (i.e. some architectures are better connected than others).

In both cases, the claim is somewhat tenuous -- in essence, it seems an unfair comparison to consider the basic epigenetic unit to be an "entity" (e.g., an entire transcription factor gene product, or an organelle), while the basic genetic unit is taken to be a single base-pair. The situation is somewhat different if the relevant comparison was the typical size of a gene (e.g., 1 kb).

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This manuscript uses an interesting abstraction of epigenetic inheritance systems as partially stable states in biological networks. This follows on previous review/commentary articles by the author. Most of the molecular epigenetic inheritance literature in multicellular organisms implies some kind of templating or copying mechanisms (DNA or histone methylation, small RNA amplification) and does not focus on stability from a systems biology perspective. By contrast, theoretical and experimental work on the stability of biological networks has focused on unicellular systems (bacteria), and neglects development. The larger part of the present manuscript (Figures 1-4) deals with such networks that could exist in bacteria. The author classifies and simulates networks of interacting entities, and (unsurprisingly) concludes that positive feedback is important for stability. This part is an interesting exercise but would need to be assessed by another reviewer for comprehensiveness and for originality in the systems biology literature. There is much literature on "epigenetic" memory in networks, with several stable states and I do not see here anything strikingly new.

An interesting part is then to discuss such networks in the framework of a multicellular organism rather than dividing unicellular organisms, and Figure 5 includes development in the picture. Finally, Figure 6 makes a model of the feedback loops in small RNA inheritance in C. elegans to explain differences in the length of inheritance of silencing in different contexts and for different genes and their sensitivity to perturbations. The proposed model for the memory length is distinct from a previously published model by Karin et al. (ref 49).

Strengths:<br /> A key strength of the manuscript is to reflect on conditions for epigenetic inheritance and its variable duration from the perspective of network stability.

Weaknesses:<br /> - I found confusing the distinction between the architecture of the network and the state in which it is. Many network components (proteins and RNAs) are coded in the genome, so a node may not disappear forever.

- From the Supplementary methods, the relationship between two nodes seems to be all in the form of dx/dt = Kxy . Y, which is just one way to model biological reactions. The generality of the results on network architectures that are heritable and robust/sensitive to change is unclear. Other interactions can have sigmoidal effects, for example. Is there no systems biology study that has addressed (meta)stability of networks before in a more general manner?

- Why is auto-regulation neglected? As this is a clear cause of metastable states that can be inherited, I was surprised not to find this among the networks.

- I did not understand the point of using the term "entity-sensor-property". Are they the same networks as above, now simulated in a computer environment step by step (thus allowing delays)?

- The final part applies the network modeling framework from above to small RNA inheritance in C. elegans. Given the positive feedback, what requires explanation is how fast the system STOPs small RNA inheritance. A previous model (Karin et al., ref. 49) builds on the fact that factors involved in inheritance are in finite quantity hence the different small RNAs "compete" for amplification and those targeting a given gene may eventually become extinct.

The present model relies on a simple positive feedback that in principle can be modulated, and this modulation remains outside the model. A possibility is to add negative regulation by factors such as HERI-1, that are known to limit the duration of the silencing.

The duration of silencing differs between genes. To explain this, the author introduces again outside the model the possibility of piRNAs acting on the mRNA, which may provide a difference in the stability of the system for different transcripts.<br /> At the end, I do not understand the point of modeling the positive feedback.

- From the initial analysis of abstract networks that do not rely on templating, I expected a discussion of possible examples from non-templated systems and was a little surprised by the end of the manuscript on small RNAs.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

In recent years, Auxin treatment has been frequently used for inducing targeted protein degradation in Drosophila and various other organisms. This approach provides a way to acutely alter the levels of specific proteins. In this manuscript, the authors examine the impact of Auxin treatment and provide strong evidence that Auxin treatment elicits alterations in feeding activity, survival rates, lipid metabolism, and gene expression patterns. Researchers should carefully consider these effects to design experiments and interpret their data.

Strengths:

Regarding the widespread usage of Auxin mediated gene manipulation method, it is important to address whether the application of Auxin itself causes any physiological changes. The authors provide evidence of several Auxin effects. Experiments are suitably designed with appropriate sample size and data analysis methods.

Weaknesses:

The provided information is limited and not very helpful for many applications. For example, although authors briefly mentioned aging research, feeding behavior, and lipid data, RNA seq data are provided only for short-term (48 hours) treatment. Especially, since ovary phenotype was examined with long-term treatment (15 days), authors should also show other data for long-term treatment as well.

Although the authors show that Auxin causes a change in gene expression patterns and suggests the possible alteration of Gal4 expression levels, no cell-type-specific data is provided. It would be informative if the authors could examine the expression level of major Gal4 drivers.<br /> Authors should discuss how severe these changes are by comparing them with other treatments or conditions, such as starvation or mutant data (ideally, comparing with reported data or their own data if any?).

Reviewer #4 (Public Review):

This work by Fleck et al. and colleagues documented the auxin feeding-induced effects in adult flies, since auxin could be used in temporally controlled gene expression using a modified Gal4/Gal80 system. Overall, the experiments were well-designed and carefully executed. The results were quantified with appropriate statistical analyses. The paper was also well-written and the results were presented logically. The findings demonstrate that auxin-fed flies have significantly lower triglyceride levels than the control flies using Ultra High-pressure Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (UHPLC-MS)-based metabolomics assays. Further transcriptome analyses using the whole flies show changes in genes involved in fatty acid metabolism. However, female oogenesis and fecundity do not seem to be affected, at least using the current assays. These results indicate that auxin may not be used in experiments involving lipid-related metabolism, but could be appropriate to be applied for other biological processes.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Recently the auxin-inducible gene expression system (AGES) has been frequently used for inducing target protein degradation acutely in Drosophila and other organisms. This study investigated the effects of auxin exposure on Drosophila adults, focusing on their feeding behavior, fatty acid metabolism, and oogenesis. The authors have provided strong evidence that high levels of auxin exposure perturb feeding behavior, survival rates, lipid metabolism, and gene expression patterns, providing a cautionary note for the field in using this technology.

This study documented the auxin feeding-induced effects in adult Drosophila, with a design with temporally controlled gene expression using a modified Gal4/Gal80 system. Due to the widespread usage of the auxin-mediated method, it is important to address whether the application of auxin itself causes any physiological changes.

Overall, the experiments were suitably designed with appropriate sample size and data analysis methods. The authors reported evidence of several auxin-induced effects, including strong evidence that high levels of auxin exposure perturb feeding behavior, survival rates, lipid metabolism, and gene expression patterns. For example, they found that auxin-fed flies have significantly lower triglyceride levels than the control flies using Ultra High-pressure Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (UHPLC-MS)-based metabolomics assays. Further transcriptome analyses using the whole flies show changes in genes involved in fatty acid metabolism. However, female oogenesis and fecundity do not seem to be affected, at least using the current assays. These results indicate that auxin may not be used in experiments involving lipid-related metabolism, but could be appropriate to be applied for other biological processes.

However, this work can be improved based on the following recommendations:

1) Although authors showed that auxin causes gene expression changes including the possible alteration of Gal4 expression levels, no cell-type-specific data is provided. It would be informative to the Drosophila field if the authors could examine major Gal4 drivers in their expression levels, such as the ones used in studying metabolism and oogenesis.

2) Although the authors briefly mentioned aging research, feeding behavior, and lipid metabolism, RNA-seq data are provided only for short-term treatment (2 days). The ovary phenotype was examined with long-term treatment (15 days). It would be informative if the authors could also show other long-term treatment data.

3) The auxin used in this work is a more water-soluble version and at a high concentration (10 mM). In the C. elegans system, researchers are using a much lower concentration of auxin typically at 1 mM. Therefore, the discussion of their results in terms of potential impacts on other experimental systems should be done carefully. It would be helpful to know what impacts might be observed at a lower concentration of auxin. The recommendation would be that the authors add the 1 mM auxin data point to key elements of their analysis.

4) Another related question is whether these detected changes are reversible or not after exposure to auxin at different concentrations. This would be informative for researchers to better design their temporally controlled experiments.

5) It would also be helpful to know whether spermatogenesis is affected or not.

6) A few other points include changing the nomenclature and validating some of the key genes shown in Figure 3 using quantitative RT-PCR experiments with the tissues where the affected genes are known to be expressed and functional.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

In this study, Fleck and colleagues investigate the effects of auxin exposure on Drosophila melanogaster adults, focusing their analysis on feeding behavior, fatty acid metabolism, and oogenesis. The motivation for the study is that auxin-inducible transcription systems are now being used by Drosophila researchers to drive transcription using the Gal4-UAS system as a complement to Gal80ts versions of the system. I found the study to be carefully done. This study will be of interest to researchers using the Drosophila system, especially those focusing on fatty acid metabolism or physiology. The authors might address the following minor points.

1) Auxin, actually 1-naphthaleneaceid acid here, which is a more water-soluble version of auxin (indole-3-acetic acid) is used at what I consider to be a high concentration-10 mM. The problem I have is that the authors are discussing their results in terms of potential impacts on other experimental systems. At least for C. elegans, I think this is not a reasonable extension of the current dataset. In the C. elegans system, researchers are using 1 mM auxin. The authors note that their RNA-seq results suggest a xenobiotic response. Could this apparent xenobiotic response be due to a metabolic byproduct following auxin administration at high concentrations? Figure S1 A shows that there is quite a robust transcriptional response at 1 mM auxin. It would be helpful to know what impacts might be observed at this lower concentration in which the transcriptional induction could be used in the context of biologically meaningful experiments. The recommendation would be that the authors add the 1 mM auxin data point to key elements of their analysis.

2) This reviewer was confused by the genetic nomenclature the authors use. The authors have chosen to use the designation 3.1Lsp2-Gal4 (3.1Lsp2-Gal4AID). I think this is potentially confusing because a reader might think that it is the Gal4 transcription factor that is the direct target of auxin- and TIR1-mediated protein degradation, as I initially did. Rather, it is the Gal80 repressor protein that is the direct target. The authors might consider a nomenclature that is more reflective of how this system works. It would also be helpful if the full genotypes of strains were included in each figure legend.

3) The RNA-seq dataset does not appear to be validated by RT-PCR experiments. The authors should consider validating some of the key genes shown in Figure 3 using quantitative RT-PCR experiments, potentially adding a 1 mM auxin data point.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The study explores the mechanisms that preserve satellite cell function in extraocular muscles (EOMs) in a mouse model of familial Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) that carries the G93A mutation in the Sod1 gene. ALS is a fatal neuromuscular disorder driven by motor neuron degeneration, leading to progressive wasting of most skeletal muscles but not EOM. The study first established that integrity of neuromuscular junction (NMJ) is preserved in EOM but not in limb and diaphragm muscles of G93A mice, and sodium butyrate (NaBu) treatment partially improves NMJ integrity in limb and diaphragm muscles of G93A mice. They also found a loss of synaptic satellite cells and renewability of cultured myoblasts in hindlimb and diaphragm muscles of G93A mice, but not in EOM, and NaBu treatment restores myoblast renewability. Using RNA-seq analysis, they identify that exon guidance molecules, particularly Cxcl12, are highly expressed in EOM myoblasts, along with more sustainable renewability. Using a neuromuscular co-culture model, they convincingly show that AAV-mediated Cxcl12 expression in G93A myotubes enhances motor axon extension and innervation. Strikingly, NaBu-mediated preservation of NMJ in limb muscles of G93A mice is associated with elevated expression of Cxcl12 in satellite cells and improved renewability of myoblasts. These results together offer molecular insights into genes critical for maintaining satellite cell function and revealing a mechanism through which NaBu ameliorates ALS.

Strengths:<br /> Combination of in vivo and cell culture models.<br /> Nice imaging of NMJ and associated satellite cells.<br /> Using motoneuron-myotube coculture to establish the mechanism.<br /> Tested and illustrated a mechanism through which a clinically used drug ameliorates ALS.

Weaknesses:<br /> Data presentation could be improved (see details in the Recommendation for Authors).<br /> It would have been nice to have included G93A motoneurons in the coculture study.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The work is potentially interesting as it outlines the role of satellite cells in supporting the functional decline of skeletal muscle due to the denervation process. In this context the authors analyze the functional and molecular characteristics of satellite cells in different muscle types differently affected by the degenerative process in the ALS model.

Strengths:<br /> The work illustrates a relevant aspect of the differences in stem cell potential in different skeletal muscles in a mouse model of the disease through a considerable amount of data and experimental models.

Weaknesses:<br /> However, there are some criticisms of the structuring of the results:

It is not clear how many animals were used in each experimental group (Figs 1 and 2, Fig. 2-9). In particular, it is unclear whether the dots in the histograms represent biological or technical replicates. Furthermore, the gender used in experimental groups is never specified. This last point appears to be important considering the gender differences observed in the SOD1G93A mouse model.

The first paragraph of the results lacks a functional analysis of the motor decline of the animals after the administration of sodium butyrate. The authors, in fact, administered NaBu around 90 days of age while in previous work the drug had been administered at a pre-symptomatic age. It would therefore be useful, to make the message more effective, to characterize the locomotor functions of the treated animals in parallel with the histological evidence of the integrity of the NMJ.

Figure 5 should be completed with the administration of NaBu also to the satellite cells isolated from the WT mouse, the same for figure 9 where AAV-CMV-Cxcl12 transduction of WT myotubes is missing.

In the experiment illustrated in Figure 8, treatment of cell cultures with NaBu would improve the outcome as well as the interference of Cxcl12 expression in myotubes derived from G93A EOM SC (Fig.9) would strengthen the specificity of this protein in axon guidance in this NMJ typical of a spared muscle in ALS.

In the "materials and methods" section the paragraph relating to the methods used for statistical analysis is missing.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In their paper, Li et al. investigate the transcriptome of satellite cells obtained from different muscle types including hindlimb, diaphragm, and extraocular muscles (EOM) from wild-type and G93A transgenic mice (end-stage ALS) in order to identify potential factors involved in the maintenance of the neuromuscular junction. The underlying hypothesis is that since EOMs are largely spared from this debilitating disease, they may secrete NMJ-protective factors. The results of their transcriptome analysis identified several axon guidance molecules including the chemokine Cxcl12, which are particularly enriched in EOM-derived satellite cells. Transduction of hindlimb-derived satellite cells with AAV encoding Cxcl12 reverted hindlimb-derived myotubes from the G93A mice into myotubes sharing phenotypic characteristics similar to those of EOM-derived satellite cells. Additionally, the authors were able to demonstrate that EOM-derived satellite cell myotube cultures are capable of enhancing axon extensions and innervation in co-culture experiments.

Strengths:<br /> The strength of the paper is that the authors successfully isolated and purified different populations of satellite cells, compared their transcriptomes, identified specific factors released by EOM-derived satellite cells, overexpressed one of these factors (the chemokine Cxcl12) by AAV-mediated transduction of hindlimb-derived satellite cells. The transduced cells were then able to support axon guidance and NMJ integrity. They also show that administration of Na butyrate to mice decreased NMJ denervation and satellite cell depletion of hind limbs. Furthermore, the addition of Na Butyrate to hindlimb-derived satellite cell myotube cultures increased Cxcl12 expression. These are impressive results providing important insights for the development of therapeutic targets to slow the loss of neuromuscular function characterizing ALS.

Weaknesses:<br /> Several important aspects have not been addressed by the authors, these include the following points which weaken the conclusions and interpretation of the results.

a) Na Butyrate was shown to extend the survival of G93A mice by Zhang et al. Na butyrate has a variety of biological effects, for example, anti-inflammatory effects inhibit mitochondrial oxidative stress, positively influence mitochondrial function, is a class I / II HDAC inhibitor, etc. What is the mechanism underlying its beneficial effects both in the context of mouse muscle function in the ALS G93A mice and in the in vitro myotube assay? Cytokine quantification as well as histone acetylation/methylation can be assessed experimentally and this is an important point that has not been appropriately investigated.

b) In the context of satellite cell characterization, on lines 151-152 the authors state that soleus muscles were excluded from further studies since they have a higher content of slow twitch fibers and are more similar to the diaphragm. This justification is not valid in the context of ALS as well as many other muscle disorders. Indeed, soleus and diaphragm muscles contain a high proportion of slow twitch fibers (up to 80% and 50% respectively) but soleus muscles are more spared than diaphragm muscles. What makes soleus muscles (and EOMs) more resistant to ALS NMJ injury? Satellite cells from soleus muscles need to be characterized in detail as well.

Furthermore, EOMs are complex muscles, containing many types of fibers and expressing different myosin heavy chain isoforms and muscle proteins. The fact that in mice both the globular layer and orbital layers of EOMs express slow myosin heavy chain isoform as well as myosin heavy chain 2X, 2A, and 2B (Zhou et al., 2010 IOVIS 51:6355-6363) also indicates that the sparing is not directly linked to the fast or slow twitch nature of the muscle fiber. This needs to be considered.

c) In the context of myotube formation from cultured satellite cells on lines 178-179 the authors stained the myotubes for myosin heavy chain. Because of the diversity of myosin heavy chain isoforms and different muscle origins of the satellite cells investigated, the isoform of myosin heavy chain expressed by the myotubes needs to be tested and described. It is not sufficient to state anti-MYH.

d) The original RNAseq results have not been deposited and while it is true that the authors have analyzed the results and described them in Figures 6 and 7 and relative supplements, the original data needs to be shown both as an xls list as a Volcano plots (q value versus log2 fold change). This will facilitate the independent interpretation of the results by the readers as some transcripts may not be listed. As presented it is rather difficult to identify which transcripts aside from Cxcl12 are commonly upregulated. Can the data be presented in a more visual way?

e) There is no section describing the statistical analysis methods used. In many figures, more than 2 groups are compared so the authors need to use an ANOVA followed by a post hoc test.

The authors have achieved their aim in showing that satellite cells derived from EOMs have a distinct transcriptome and that this may be the basis of their sparing in ALS. Furthermore, this work may help develop future therapeutic interventions for patients with ALS.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study is carefully designed and well executed, including a comprehensive suite of endpoint measures and large sample sizes that give confidence in the results. The authors have satisfactorily addressed my concerns. Specifically, the new graphical description of the experimental design along a timeline will be very helpful in guiding the reader through the paper. The narrative style is much improved and highly technical terminology is minimized. The authors now also address the question of sex differences, which will be important to study in future research. The additional analyses carried out by the authors are illuminating.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

It is well known that as seasonal day length increases, molecular cascades in the brain are triggered to ready an individual for reproduction. Some of these changes, however, can begin to occur before the day length threshold is reached, suggesting that short days similarly have the capacity to alter aspects of phenotype. This study seeks to understand the mechanisms by which short days can accomplish this task, which is an interesting and important question in the field of organismal biology and endocrinology.

The set of studies that this manuscript presents is comprehensive and well-controlled. Many of the effects are also strong and thus offer tantalizing hints about the endo-molecular basis by which short days might stimulate major changes in body condition. Another strength is that the authors put together a compelling model for how different facets of an animal's reproductive state come "on line" as day length increases and spring approaches. In this way, I think the authors broadly fulfill their aims.

Joint Public Review:

The authors have greatly improved the manuscript after detailed revisions. I would like to discuss with the authors on how to make their findings more general across taxonomic groups. For example, whether it is possible for authors to conduct a more comprehensive analyses by including amphibians, birds, and mammals together to test the general role of the relationship between brain evolution and environmental resources, and what ecological factors determine the observed brain size variations among taxa except for their biological differences such as energetic demands. It is especially for population-level analyses when related data is available in the future, which may provide very helpful insights into the brain size biogeographic patterns and their determinants across taxa.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study revealed that one of the mechanisms for iTreg (induced-Treg) lineage instability upon restimulation is through sustained store-operated calcium entry (SOCE), which activates transcription factor NFAT and promotes changes in chromatin accessibility to activated T cell-related genes. The authors revealed that, unlike thymus-derived Tregs (tTreg) with blunted calcium signaling and NFAT activation, iTregs respond to TCR restimulation with fully activated SOCE and NFAT similar to activated conventional T cells. Activated NFAT binds to open chromatin regions in genes related to T helper cells, increases their expression, and leads to the instability of iTreg cells. On the other hand, inhibition of the SOCE/NFAT pathway by chemical inhibitors could partially rescue the loss of Foxp3 expression in iTreg upon restimulation. The conclusion of the study is unexpected since previous studies showed that NFAT is required for Foxp3 induction and iTreg differentiation (Tone Y et al, Nat Immunol. 2008, PMID: 18157133; Vaeth M et al, PNAS, 2012, PMID: 22991461). Additionally, Foxp3 interacts with NFAT to control Treg function (Wu Y et al, Cell, 2006, PMID: 16873067). The data presented in this study demonstrated the complex role NFAT plays in the generation and stability of iTreg cells.

Several concerns are raised from the current study.<br /> 1. Previous studies showed that iTregs generated in vitro from culturing naïve T cells with TGF-b are intrinsically unstable, and prone to losing Foxp3 expression due to lack of DNA demethylation in the enhancer region of the Foxp3 locus (Polansky JK et al, Eur J Immunol., 2008, PMID: 18493985). It is known that removing TGF-b from the culture media leads to rapid loss of Foxp3 expression. In the current study, TGF-b was not added to the media during iTreg restimulation, therefore, the primary cause for iTreg instability should be the lack of the positive signal provided by TGF-b. NFAT signal is secondary at best in this culturing condition.

This point has been addressed in the revision. Figure Q1 could be added to the manuscript as a supplementary figure.

2. It is not clear whether the NFAT pathway is unique in accelerating the loss of Foxp3 expression upon iTreg restimulation. It is also possible that enhancing T cell activation in general could promote iTreg instability. The authors could explore blocking T cell activation by inhibiting other critical pathways, such as NF-kb and c-Jun/c-Fos, to see if a similar effect could be achieved compared to CsA treatment.

This point has been sufficiently addressed in the revision.

3. The authors linked chromatin accessibility and increased expression of T helper cell genes to the loss of Foxp3 expression and iTreg instability. However, it is not clear how the former can lead to the latter. It is also not clear whether NFAT binds directly to the Foxp3 locus in the restimulated iTregs and inhibits Foxp3 expression.

This point has been addressed in the rebuttal. Could the authors incorporate their comments in the rebuttal into the discussion section of the revised manuscript?

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The phenotypic instability of in vitro-induced Treg cells (iTregs) has been discussed for a long time, mainly in the context of the epigenetic landscape of Treg-signature genes; e.g. Treg-specifically CpG-hypomethylated Foxp3 CNS2 enhancer region. However, it has been insufficiently understood the upstream molecular mechanisms, the particularity of intracellular signaling of natural Treg cells, and how they connect to stable/unstable suppressive function.

Huiyun Lv et al. addressed the issue of phenotypic instability of in vitro-induced regulatory T cells (iTregs), which is a different point from the physiological natural Treg cells and an obstacle to the therapeutic use of iTreg cells. The authors focused on the difference between iTreg and nTreg cells from the perspective of their control of store-operated calcium entry (SOCE)-mediated cellular signaling, and they clearly showed that the sustained SOCE signaling in iTreg and nTreg cells led to phenotypic instability. Moreover, the authors pointed out the correlation between the incomplete conversion of chromatin configuration and the NFAT-mediated control of effector-type gene expression profile in iTreg cells. These findings potentially cultivate our understanding of the cellular identity of regulatory T cells and may shed light on the therapeutic use of Treg cells in many clinical contexts.

The authors demonstrated the biological contribution of Ca2+ signaling with the variable methods, which ensure the reliability of the results and the claims of the authors. iTreg cells sustained SOCE-signaling upon stimulation while natural Treg cells had lower strength and shorter duration of SOCE-signaling. The result was consistent with the previously proposed concept; a certain range of optimal strength and duration of TCR-signaling shape the Treg generation and maintenance, and it provides us with further in-depth mechanistic understanding.

In the later section, authors found the incomplete installment of Treg-type open chromatin landscape in some effector/helper function-related gene loci in iTreg cells. These findings propose the significance of focusing on not only the "Treg"-associated gene loci but also "Teffector-ness"-associated regions to determine the Treg conversion at the epigenetic level.

Limitations;<br /> ・NFAT regulation did not explain all of the differences between iTregs and nTregs, as the authors mentioned as a limitation.<br /> ・Also, it is still an open question whether NFAT can directly modulate the chromatin configuration on the effector-type gene loci, or whether NFAT exploits pre-existing open chromatin due to the incomplete conversion of Treg-type chromatin landscape in iTreg cells. The authors did not fully demonstrate that the distinct pattern of chromatin regional accessibility found in iTreg cells is the direct cause of an effector-type gene expression.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The authors of this study seek to visualize NS1 purified from dengue virus infected cells. They infect vero cells with DV2-WT and DV2 NS1-T164S (a mutant virus previously characterized by the authors). The authors utilize an anti-NS1 antibody to immunoprecipitate NS1 from cell supernatants and then elute the antibody/NS1 complex with acid. The authors evaluate the eluted NS1 by SDS-PAGE, Native Page, mass spec, negative-stain EM, and eventually Cryo-EM. SDS-PAGE, mas spec, and native page reveal a >250 Kd species containing both NS1 and the proteinaceous component of HDL (ApoA1). The authors produce evidence to suggest that this population is predominantly NS1 in complex with ApoA1. This contrasts with recombinantly produced NS1 (obtained from a collaborator) which did not appear to be in complex with or contain ApoA1 (Figure 1C). The authors then visualize their NS1 stock in complex with their monoclonal antibody by CryoEM. For NS1-WT, the major species visualized by the authors was a ternary complex of an HDL particle in complex with an NS1 dimer bound to their mAB. For their mutant NS1-T164S, they find similar structures, but in contrast to NS1-WT, they visualize free NS1 dimers in complex with 2 Fabs (similar to what's been reported previously) as one of the major species. This highlights that different NS1 species have markedly divergent structural dynamics. It's important to note that the electron density maps for their structures do appear to be a bit overfitted since there are many regions with electron density that do not have a predicted fit and their HDL structure does not appear to have any predicted secondary structure for ApoA1. The authors then map the interaction between NS1 and ApoA1 using cross-linking mass spectrometry revealing numerous NS1-ApoA1 contact sites in the beta-roll and wing domain. The authors find that NS1 isolated from DENV infected mice is also present as a >250 kD species containing ApoA1. They further determine that immunoprecipitation of ApoA1 out of the sera from a single dengue patient correlates with levels of NS1 (presumably COIPed by ApoA1) in a dose-dependent manner.

In the end, the authors make some useful observations for the NS1 field (mostly confirmatory) providing additional insight into the propensity of NS1 to interact with HDL and ApoA1. The study does not provide any functional assays to demonstrate activity of their proteins or conduct mutagenesis (or any other assays) to support their interaction predications. The authors assertion that higher-order NS1 exists primarily as a NS1 dimer in complex with HDL is not well supported as their purification methodology of NS1 likely introduces bias as to what NS1 complexes are isolated. While their results clearly reveal NS1 in complex with ApoA1, the lack of other NS1 homo-oligomers may be explained by how they purify NS1 from virally infected supernatant. Because NS1 produced during viral infection is not tagged, the authors use an anti-NS1 monoclonal antibody to purify NS1. This introduces a source of bias since only NS1 oligomers with their mAb epitope exposed will be purified. Further, the use of acid to elute NS1 may denature or alter NS1 structure and the authors do not include controls to test functionality of their NS1 stocks (capacity to trigger endothelial dysfunction or immune cell activation). The acid elution may force NS1 homo-oligomers into dimers which then reassociate with ApoA1 in a manner that is not reflective of native conditions. Conducting CryoEM of NS1 stocks only in the presence of full-length mAbs or Fabs also severely biases what species of NS1 is visualized since any NS1 oligomers without the B-ladder domain exposed will not be visualized. If the residues obscured by their mAb are involved in formation of higher-order oligomers then this antibody would functionally inhibit these species from forming. The absence of critical controls, use of one mAb, and acid elution for protein purification severely limits the interpretation of these data and do not paint a clear picture of if NS1 produced during infection is structurally distinct from recombinant NS1. Certainly there is novelty in purifying NS1 from virally infected cells, but without using a few different NS1 antibodies to purify NS1 stocks (or better yet a polyclonal population of antibodies) it's unclear if the results of the authors are simply a consequence of the mAb they selected.

Data produced from numerous labs studying structure and function of flavivirus NS1 proteins provide diverse lines of evidence that the oligomeric state of NS1 is dynamic and can shift depending on context and environment. This means that the methodology used for NS1 production and purification will strongly impact the results of a study. The data in this manuscript certainly capture one of these dynamic states and overall support the general model of a dynamic NS1 oligomer that can associate with both host proteins as well as itself but the assertions of this manuscript are overall too strong given their data, as there is little evidence in this manuscript, and none available in the large body of existing literature, to support that NS1 exists only as a dimer associated with ApoA1. More likely the results of this paper are a result of their NS1 purification methodology.

Suggestions for the Authors:

Major:

1. Because of the methodology used for NS1 purification, it is not clear from the data provided if NS1 from viral infection differs from recombinant NS1. Isolating NS1 from viral infection using a polyclonal antibody population would be better to answer their questions. On this point, Vero cells are also not the best candidate for their NS1 production given these cells do not come from a human. A more relevant cell line like U937-DC-SIGN would be preferable.

2. The authors need to support their interaction predictions and models via orthogonal assays like mutagenesis followed by HDL/ApoA1 complexing and even NS1 functional assays. The authors should be able to mutate NS1 at regions predicted to be critical for ApoA1/HDL interaction. This is critical to support the central conclusions of this manuscript.

3. The authors need to show that the NS1 stocks produced using acid elution are functional compared to standard recombinantly produced NS1. Do acidic conditions impact structure/function of NS1?

4. Overall, the data obtained from the mutant NS1 (contrasted to WT NS1) reveals how dynamic the oligomeric state of NS1 proteins are but the authors do not provide any insight into how/why this is, some additional lines of evidence using either structural studies or mutagenesis to compare WT and their mutant and even NS1 from a different serotype of DENV would help the field to understand the dynamic nature of NS1.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

Chew et al describe interaction of the flavivirus protein NS1 with HDL using primarily cryoEM and mass spec. The NS1 was secreted from dengue virus infected Vero cells, and the HDL were derived from the 3% FBS in the culture media. NS1 is a virulence factor/toxin and is a biomarker for dengue infection in patients. The mechanisms of its various activities in the host are incompletely understood. NS1 has been seen in dimer, tetramer and hexamer forms. It is well established to interact with membrane surfaces, presumably through a hydrophobic surface of the dimer form, and the recombinant protein has been shown to bind HDL. In this study, cryoEM and crosslinking-mass spec are used to examine NS1 secreted from virus-infected cells, with the conclusion that the sNS1 is predominantly/exclusively HDL-associated through specific contacts with the ApoA1 protein.

Strengths:

The experimental results are consistent with previously published data.

Weaknesses:

CryoEM:

Some of the neg-stain 2D class averages for sNS1 in Fig S1 clearly show 1 or 2 NS1 dimers on the surface of a spherical object, presumably HDL, and indicate the possibility of high-quality cryoEM results. However, the cryoEM results are disappointing. The cryo 2D class averages and refined EM map in Fig S4 are of poor quality, indicating sub-optimal grid preparation or some other sample problem. Some of the FSC curves (2 in Fig S7 and 1 in Fig S6) have extremely peculiar shapes, suggesting something amiss in the map refinement. The sharp drop in the "corrected" FSC curves in Figs S5c and S6c (upper) indicate severe problems. The stated resolutions (3.42 & 3.82 Å) for the sNS1ts-Fab56.2 are wildly incompatible with the images of the refined maps in Figs 3 & S7. At those resolutions, clear secondary structural elements should be visible throughout the map. From the 2D averages and 3D maps shown in the figures this does not seem to be the case. Local resolution maps should be shown for each structure.

The samples were clearly challenging for cryoEM, leading to poor quality maps that were difficult to interpret. None of the figures are convincing that NS1, Ab56.2 or Fab56.2 are correctly fit into EM maps. There is no indication of ApoA1 helices. Details of the fit of models to density for key regions of the higher-resolution EM maps should be shown and the models should be deposited in the PDB. An example of modeling difficulty is clear in the sNS1ts dimer with bound Fab56.2 (figs 3c & S7e). For this complex, the orientation of the Fab56.2 relative to the sNS1ts dimer in this submission (Fig 3c) is substantially different than in the bioRxiv preprint (Fig 3c). Regions of empty density in Fig 3c also illustrate the challenge of building a model into this map.

Mass spec:

Crosslinking-mass spec was used to detect contacts between NS1 and ApoA1, providing strong validation of the sNS1-HDL association. As the crosslinks were detected in a bulk sample, they show that NS1 is near ApoA1 in many/most HDL particles, but they do not indicate a specific protein-protein complex. Thus, the data do not support the model of an NS1-ApoA1 complex in Fig 4d. Further, a specific NS1-ApoA1 interaction should have evidence in the EM maps (helical density for ApoA1), but none is shown or mentioned. If such exists, it could perhaps be visualized after focused refinement of the map for sNS1ts-HDL with Fab56.2 (Fig S7d). The finding that sNS1-ApoA1 crosslinks involved residues on the hydrophobic surface of the NS1 dimer confirms previous data that this NS1 surface engages with membranes and lipids.

Sample quality:

The paper lacks any validation that the purified sNS1 retains established functions, for example the ability to enhance virus infectivity or to promote endothelial dysfunction. Peculiarities include the gel filtration profiles (Fig 2a), which indicate identical elution volumes (apparent MWs) for sNS1wt-HDL bound to Ab562 (~150 kDa) and to the ~3X smaller Fab56.2 (~50 kDa). There should also be some indication of sNS1wt-HDL pairs crosslinked by the full-length Ab, as can be seen in the raw cryoEM micrograph (Fig S5b).

Obtaining high quality structures is often more demanding of sample integrity than are activity assays. Given the low quality of the cryoEM maps, it's possible that the acidification step in immunoaffinity purification damaged the HDL complex. No validation of HDL integrity, for example with acid-treated HDL, is reported. Acid treatment is perhaps discounted by a statement (line 464) that another group also used immunoaffinity purification in a recent study (ref 20) reporting sNS1 bound to HDL. However the statement is incorrect; the cited study used affinity purification via a strep-tag on recombinant sNS1.

Discussion:

The Discussion reflects a view that the NS1 secreted from virus-infected cells is a 1:1 sNS1dimer:HDL complex with the specific NS1-ApoA1 contacts detected by crosslinking mass spec. This is inconsistent with both the neg-stain 2D class average with 2 sNS1 dimers on an HDL (Fig S1c) and with the recent study of Flamand & co-workers showing 1-3 NS1 dimers per HDL (ref 20). It is also ignores the propensity of NS1 to associate with membranes and lipids. It is far more likely that NS1 association with HDL is driven by these hydrophobic interactions than by specific protein-protein contacts. A lengthy Discussion section (lines 461-522) includes several chemically dubious or inconsistent statements, all based on the assumption that specific ApoA1 contacts are essential to NS1 association with HDL and that sNS1 oligomers higher than the dimer necessarily involve ApoA1 interaction, conclusions that are not established by the data in this paper.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Transposable Elements (TEs) are exogenously acquired DNA regions that have played important roles in the evolutional acquisition of various biological functions. TEs may have been important in the evolution of the immune system, but their role in thymocytes has not been fully clarified.

Using the human thymus scRNA dataset, the authors suggest the existence of cell type-specific TE functions in the thymus. In particular, it is interesting to show that there is a unique pattern in the type and expression level of TEs in thymic antigen-presenting cells, such as mTECs and pDCs, and that they are associated with transcription factor activities. Furthermore, the authors suggested that TEs may be non-redundantly regulated in expression by Aire, Fezf2, and Chd4, and that some TE-derived products are translated and present as proteins in thymic antigen-presenting cells. These findings provide important insights into the evolution of the acquired immune system and the process by which the thymus acquires its function as a primary lymphoid tissue.

Strengths:<br /> 1. By performing single-cell level analysis using scRNA-seq datasets, the authors extracted essential information on heterogeneity within the cell population. It is noteworthy that this revealed the diversity of expression not only of known autoantigens but also of TEs in thymic antigen-presenting cells.

2. The attempt to use mass spectrometry to confirm the existence of TE-derived peptides is worthwhile, even if the authors did not obtain data on as many transcripts as expected.

3. The use of public data sets and the clearly stated methods of analysis improved the transparency of the results.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1. The authors sometimes made overstatements largely due to the lack or shortage of experimental evidence.

For example in figure 4, the authors concluded that thymic pDCs produced higher copies of TE-derived RNAs to support the constitutive expression of type-I interferons in thymic pDCs, unlike peripheral pDCs. However, the data was showing only the correlation between the distinct TE expression pattern in pDCs and the abundance of dsRNAs. We are compelled to say that the evidence is totally too weak to mention the function of TEs in the production of interferon. Even if pDCs express a distinct type and amount of TE-derived transcripts, it may be a negligible amount compared to the total cellular RNAs. How many TE-derived RNAs potentially form the dsRNAs? Are they over-expressed in pDCs?<br /> The data interpretation requires more caution to connect the distinct results of transcriptome data to the biological significance.

2. Lack of generality of specific examples. This manuscript discusses the whole genomic picture of TE expression. In addition, one good way is to focus on the specific example to clearly discuss the biological significance of the acquisition of TEs for the thymic APC functions and the thymic selection.

In figure 2, the authors focused on ETS-1 and its potential target genes ZNF26 and MTMR3, however, the significance of these genes in NK cell function or development is unclear. The authors should examine and discuss whether the distinct features of TEs can be found among the genomic loci that link to the fundamental function of the thymus, e.g., antigen processing/presentation.

3. Since the deep analysis of the dataset yielded many intriguing suggestions, why not add a discussion of the biological reasons and significance?<br /> For example, in Figure 1, why is TE expression negatively correlated with proliferation? cTEC-TE is mostly postnatal, while mTEC-TE is more embryonic. What does this mean?

4. To consolidate the experimental evidence about pDCs and TE-derived dsRNAs, one option is to show the amount of TE-derived RNA copies among total RNAs. The immunohistochemistry analysis in figure 4 requires additional data to demonstrate that overlapped staining was not caused by technical biases (e.g. uneven fixation may cause the non-specifically stained regions/cells). To show this, authors should have confirmed not only the positive stainings but also the negative staining (e.g. CD3, etc.). Another possible staining control was showing that non-pDC (CD303- cell fractions in this case) cells were less stained by the ds-RNA probe.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary: Larouche et al show that TEs are broadly expressed in thymic cells, especially in mTECs and pDCs. Their data suggest a possible involvement of TEs in thymic gene regulation and IFN-alpha secretion. They also show that at least some TE-derived peptides are presented by MHC-I in the thymus.

Strengths: The idea of high/broad TE expression in the thymus as a mechanism for preventing TE-mediated autoimmunity is certainly an attractive one, as is their involvement in IFN-alpha secretion therein. The analyses and experiments presented here are therefore a very useful primer for more in-depth experiments, as the authors point out towards the end of the discussion.

Weaknesses: Throughout the manuscript, most conclusions are presented as proven causal relationships that the current data do not demonstrate. In the abstract, results, and discussion, the following conclusions are drawn that are not supported by the data: a) TEs interact with multiple transcription factors in thymic cells, b) TE expression leads to dsRNA formation, activation of RIG-I/MDA5 and secretion of IFN-alpha, c) TEs are regulated by cell proliferation and expression of KZFPs in the thymus. All these statements derive from correlations. Only one TF has ChIP-seq data associated with it, dsRNA formation and/or IFN-alpha secretion could be independent of TE expression, and whilst KZFPs most likely regulate TEs in the thymus, the data do not demonstrate it. The authors also seem to suggest that AIRE, FEZF2, and CHD4 regulate TEs directly, but binding is not shown. The manuscript needs a thorough revision to be absolutely clear about the correlative nature of the described associations.

On the technical side, there are many dangers about analysing RNA-seq data at the subfamily level and without stringent quality control checks. Outputs may be greatly confounded by pervasive transcription (see PMID 31425522), DNA contamination, and overlap of TEs with highly expressed genes. Whether TE transcripts are independent units or part of a gene also has important implications for the conclusions drawn. I would say that for most purposes of this work, an analysis restricted to independent TE transcripts, with appropriate controls for DNA contamination, would provide great reassurances that the results from subfamily-level analyses are sound. Showing examples from the genome browser throughout would also help.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

This work provides significant insight into freshwater cable bacteria (CB) and is an important contribution to the emerging CB literature. In this manuscript, Yang et al. describe current-voltage measurements on CB collected from two freshwater sources in Southern California. The studies use electrostatic and conductive atomic force microscopies, as well as four-probe measurements. These measurements are consistent with back-of-the-envelope calculations on conductivities needed to sustain CB function. The data shows that freshwater CB have a similar structure and function to the more studied marine cable bacteria.

Strengths:

Excellent measurements on a new class of cable bacteria.

Weaknesses:

The paper would benefit from additional analysis of the data.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this work, Mohamed Y. El-Naggar and co-workers present a detailed electronic characterization of cable bacteria from Southern California freshwater sediments. The cable bacteria could be reliably enriched in laboratory incubations, and subsequent TEM characterization and 16S rRNA gene phylogeny demonstrated their belonging to the genus Candidatus Electronema. Atomic force microscopy and two-point probe resistance measurements were then used to map out the characteristics of the conductive nature, followed by microelectrode four-probe measurements to quantify the conductivity.

Interestingly, the authors observe that some freshwater cable bacteria filaments displayed a higher degree of robustness upon oxygen exposure than what was previously reported for marine cable bacteria. Finally, a single nanofiber conductivity on the order of 0.1 S/cm is calculated, which matches the expected electron current densities linking electrogenic sulphur oxidation to oxygen reduction in sediment. This is consistent with hopping transport.

Strengths and weaknesses:

A comprehensive study is applied to characterise the conductive properties of the sampled freshwater cable bacteria. Electrostatic force microscopy and conductive atomic force microscopy provide direct evidence of the location of conductive structures. Four-probe microelectrode devices are used to quantify the filament resistance, which presents a significant advantage over commonly used two-probe measurements that include contributions from contact resistances. While the methodology is convincing, I find that some of the conclusions seem to be drawn on very limited sample sizes, which display widely different behaviour. In particular:

The authors observe that the conductivity of freshwater filaments may be less sensitive to oxygen exposure than previously observed for marine filaments. This is indeed the case for an interdigitated array microelectrode experiment (presented in Figure 5) and for a conductive atomic force microscopy experiment (described in line 391), but the opposite is observed in another experiment (Figure S1). It is therefore difficult to assess the validity of the conclusion until sufficient experimental replications are presented.

The calculation of a single nanofiber conductivity is based on experiment and calculation with significant uncertainty. E.g. for the number of nanofibres in a single filament that varies depending on the filament size (Frontiers in microbiology, 2018, 9: 3044.), and the measured CB resistance, which does not scale well with inner probe separation (Figure 5). A more rigorous consideration of these uncertainties is required.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors are developing differences in the dynamics and allostery of the SARS-COV-2 spike protein for several of the variants. They consider mainly the delta, omicron, and Omicron XBB, and show major differences in the dynamics of the open forms. In the most compelling step, they go further and compare against experimental values of IC50 and KD.

Overall, this is an important application of methods that were developed in the senior author's lab.

Strengths:<br /> The paper presents a strong case for the difference in the dynamical behavior of these sequence variants and relates this to available experiments.

Weaknesses:<br /> The work does not drill down to the effects of individual mutations, which might be possible and would improve our understanding of the effects of single mutations and would dissect the contributions of each single difference in sequence.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors set out to identify CAPs (Candidate Adaptive Polymorphyisms), i.e., simply put mutations that carry a potential functional advantage, and utilize computational methods based on the perturbation of C-alpha positions with an Elastic Network Model to determine if dynamics of CAP residues are different in any way.

In my opinion this manuscript *may* suffer from fundamental flaws in the detection of CAPs, and does not provide enough analysis and discussion to determine if the methodology is applicable. A highly expanded and rewritten manuscript may help clarify the results. Lastly, the authors severely ignore the vast literature and results already in the public domain, not only with respect to the use of normal-mode analysis methods as well as the detection of functionally relevant mutations in general and to understand the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein in particular.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The manuscript uses a combination of evolutionary approaches and structural/dynamics observations to provide mechanistic insights into the adaptation of the Spike protein during the evolution of variants.

Strengths:<br /> Very well-written text, pleasant and well-described pictures, and didactical and clear description of the methods.<br /> The citation of relevant similar results with different approaches is of note.<br /> Comparing the calculated scores with previous experimentally obtained data is one of the strongest points of the manuscript.

Weaknesses:<br /> A longer discussion of how the 19 orthologous coronavirus sequences were chosen would be helpful, as the rest of the paper hinges on this initial choice.<br /> The 'reasonable similarity' with previously published data is not well defined, nor there was any comment about some of the residues analyzed (namely 417-484).<br /> There seem to be no replicas of the MD simulations, nor a discussion of the convergence of these simulations.<br /> A more detailed description of the equilibration and production schemes used in MD would be helpful.<br /> Moreover, there is no discussion of how the equilibration procedure is evaluated, in particular for non-experts this would be helpful in judging the reliability of the procedure.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, Butkovic et al. perform a genome-wide association (GWA) study on Arabidopsis thaliana inoculated with the natural pathogen turnip mosaic virus (TuMV) in laboratory conditions, with the aim to identify genetic associations with virus infection-related parameters. For this purpose, they use a large panel of A. thaliana inbred lines and two strains of TuMV, one naïve and one pre-adapted through experimental evolution. A strong association is found between a region in chromosome 2 (1.5 Mb) and the risk of systemic necrosis upon viral infection, although the causative gene remains to be pinpointed.

This project is a remarkable tour de force, but the conclusions that can be reached from the results obtained are unfortunately underwhelming. Some aspects of the work could be clarified, and presentation modified, to help the reader.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The manuscript presents a valuable investigation of genetic associations related to plant resistance against the turnip mosaic virus (TuMV) using Arabidopsis thaliana as a model. The study infects over 1,000 A. thaliana inbred lines with both ancestral and evolved TuMV and assesses four disease-related traits: infectivity, disease progress, symptom severity, and necrosis. The findings reveal that plants infected with the evolved TuMV strain generally exhibited more severe disease symptoms than those infected with the ancestral strain. However, there was considerable variation among plant lines, highlighting the complexity of plant-virus interactions.

A major genetic locus on chromosome 2 was identified, strongly associated with symptom severity and necrosis. This region contained several candidate genes involved in plant defense against viruses. The study also identified additional genetic loci associated with necrosis, some common to both viral isolates and others specific to individual isolates. Structural variations, including transposable element insertions, were observed in the genomic region linked to disease traits.

Surprisingly, the minor allele associated with increased disease symptoms was geographically widespread among the studied plant lines, contrary to typical expectations of natural selection limiting the spread of deleterious alleles. Overall, this research provides valuable insights into the genetic basis of plant responses to TuMV, highlighting the complexity of these interactions and suggesting potential avenues for improving crop resilience against viral infections.

Overall, the manuscript is well-written, and the data are generally high-quality. The study is generally well-executed and contributes to our understanding of plant-virus interactions. I suggest that the authors consider the following points in future versions of this manuscript:

1. Major allele and minor allele definition: When these two concepts are mentioned in the figure, there is no clear definition of the two words in the text. Especially for major alleles, there is no clear definition in the whole text. It is recommended that the author further elaborate on these two concepts so that readers can more easily understand the text and figures.

2. Possible confusion caused by three words (Major focus / Major association and major allele): Because there is no explanation of the major allele in the text, it may cause readers to be confused with these two places in the text when trying to interpret the meaning of major allele: major locus (line 149)/ the major association with disease phenotypes (line 183).

3. Discussion: The authors could provide a more detailed discussion of how the research findings might inform crop protection strategies or breeding programs.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary of Work<br /> This paper conducts the largest GWAS study of A. thaliana in response to a viral infection. The paper identifies a 1.5 MB region in the chromosome associated with disease, including SNPs, structural variation, and transposon insertions. Studies further validate the association experimentally with a separate experimental infection procedure with several lines and specific T-DNA mutants. Finally, the paper presents a geographic analysis of the minor disease allele and the major association. The major take-home message of the paper is that structural variants and not only SNPs are important changes associated with disease susceptibility. The manuscript also makes a strong case for negative frequency-dependent selection maintaining a disease susceptibility locus at low frequency.

Strengths and Weaknesses<br /> A major strength of this manuscript is the large sample sizes, careful experimental design, and rigor in the follow-up experiments. For instance, mentioning non-infected controls and using methods to determine if geographic locus associations were due to chance. The strong result of a GWAS-detected locus is impressive given the complex interaction between plant genotypes and strains noted in the results. In addition to the follow-up experiments, the geographic analysis added important context and broadened the scope of the study beyond typical lab-based GWAS studies. I find very few weaknesses in this manuscript.

Support of Conclusions<br /> The support for the conclusions is exceptional. This is due to the massive amount of evidence for each statement and also due to the careful consideration of alternative explanations for the data.

Significance of Work<br /> This manuscript will be of great significance in plant disease research, both for its findings and its experimental approach. The study has very important implications for genetic associations with disease beyond plants.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

The authors' goal here was to explore how a non-hebbian form of plasticity, heterosynaptic LTP, could shape neuronal responses and learning. They used several conceptually and technically innovative approaches to answer this. First, they identified a behavioral paradigm that was a subthreshold training paradigm (stimulation of thalamic inputs with a footshock), which could be 'converted' to memory via homosynaptic LTP (HFS of thalamic inputs). They then found that stimulation of 'cortical' inputs could also convert the subthreshold stimulation to a lasting memory and that this was associated with a change in neuronal response, akin to LTP. Finally, they provided some slice work that demonstrated that stimulation of cortical inputs could stabilize LTP at thalamic inputs.

Strengths:

1) The approach was innovative and asked an important question in the field.

2) The studies are, for the most part, quite rigorous, using a novel dual opsin approach to probe multiple inputs in vivo.

3) The authors explore neural responses both in vivo and ex vivo, as well as leveraging a 'simple' behavior output of freezing.

Weaknesses:

1) There appears to be a flaw in the exploration of cortical inputs. the authors never show that HFS of cortical inputs has no effect in the absence of thalamic stimulation. It appears that there is a citation showing this, but I think it would be important to show this in this study as well.

2) It is somewhat confusing that the authors refer to the cortical input as driving heterosynaptic LTP, but this is not shown until Figure 4J, that after non-associative conditioning (unpaired shock and tone) HFS of the cortex can drive freezing and heterosynaptic LTP of thalamic inputs. Further, the authors are 'surprised' by this outcome, which appears to be what they predict.

3) 'Cortex' as a stimulation site is vague. The authors have coordinates they used, it is unclear why they are not using standard anatomical nomenclature.

4) The authors' repeated use of homoLTP and heteroLTP to define the input that is being stimulated makes it challenging to understand the experimental detail. While I appreciate this is part of the goal, more descriptive words such as 'thalamic' and 'cortical' would make this much easier to understand.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Faress et al. ask the question of how synaptic plasticity (i.e. long-term potentiation, LTP) induced at different time points and different synapses in relationship to learning can transform memories supported by these circuits. The authors adopted an experimental design developed by Nabavi et al, 2014 and used male mice to optogenetically induce a weak fear memory in thalamo-LA circuits by pairing an optical conditioned stimulus (CS) at thalamo-LA synapses with a footshock unconditioned stimulus (US), or subjected the mice to an unpairing of the opto-CS and the footshock US. They then investigated how homosynaptic (thalamo-LA)- or heterosynaptic (cortico-LA) high-frequency stimulation (HFS) -that would induce LTP- delivered at different time points before and after learning can transform the opto-fear memory by using state of the art in vivo dual-wavelength optogenetics. They find that homosynaptic HFS delivered before or after learning transforms weak memories into stronger ones, whereas heterosynaptic HFS can do so when delivered immediately after learning. Both homo- and hetero-HFS delivered after unpairing produce a 24 h fear memory for the opto-CS. Lastly, they show that synaptic potentiation accompanies the strengthening of fear memory induced by hetero HFS in freely moving mice.

The significance of the study lies in showing in vivo that plasticity induced at different times or different synapses than those engaged during learning can modify memory and the synaptic strength in a synaptic pathway related to that memory. While heterosynaptic and timing-dependent effects in synaptic plasticity have been described largely ex vivo on shorter time scales, the discovery of lasting behavioral effects on memory is novel.

A strength of the study is that it uses well-defined and elegant optogenetic manipulations of distinct neural pathways in awake-behaving mice combined with in vivo recordings, which allows the authors to directly manipulate and monitor synaptic strength and memory.

The conclusions of this paper are mostly well supported by the data, but there are some aspects that should be resolved:

1. The experimental design for assessing the effects of applying HFS 24 h after conditioning should be clarified, and it should be re-evaluated which experimental groups can be compared and how. The experimental schemes in Figs. 1 and 3 (and Fig. 4e and extended data 4a,b) show that one group of animals was subjected to retrieval in the test context at 24 h, then received HFS, which was then followed by a second retrieval session. With this design, it remains unclear what the HFS impacts when it is delivered between these two 24 h memory retrieval sessions. It would be nice to see these data parsed out in a clean experimental design for all experiments (in Figs 1, 3, and 4), that means 4 groups with different treatments that are all tested only once at 24 h, and the appropriate statistical tests (ANOVA). This would also avoid repeating data in different panels for different pairwise comparisons (Fig 1, Fig 3, Fig 4, and extended Fig 4).

2. The final experiment (Fig. 5a-c, extended data 5c) combines behavioral assessments with in vivo LFP recordings before and 24 h after hetero-HFS. While this experiment is demanding, it seems a bit underpowered and not well-controlled. It would be critical to know if LFPs change over 24 h in animals in which memory is not altered by HFS, and to see correlations between memory performance and LFP changes, as two animals displayed low freezing levels. Also, the slice experiments (Fig. 5d-f) are not well aligned with the in vivo experiments (juvenile animals, electrical vs. opto stimulation, different HFS protocols, timescale of hours). They would suggest that thalamo-LA potentiation occurs directly after learning+HFS (which could be tested) and is maintained over 24 h.

3. The statistical analyses need to be clarified. All statements should be supported with statistical testing (e.g. extended data 5c, pg 7 stats are missing). The specific tests should be clearly stated throughout. For ANOVAs, the post-hoc tests and their outcomes should be stated. In some cases, 2-way ANOVAs were performed, but it seems there is only one independent variable, calling for one-way ANOVA.

4. There are a number of details in the methods and procedures that need to be elaborated on and clarified for the reader. All of them will be listed in the recommendations to the authors.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this study, Faress and colleagues investigated the differential contributions of Hebbian and non-hebbian plasticity to long-term memory. For this, the authors relied on in vivo optogenetic manipulations of thalamic (Th) and cortical (Ctx) inputs to the lateral amygdala (LA), a circuit whose role in associative memories is well established. The authors first begin by demonstrating that following a weak association protocol (also involving opto stimulation of the Th input) high-frequency stimulation (HFS) of the Th input induces robust conditioned responses (CR) 24 hours later. The authors then use two excitatory opsins to independently manipulate Ctx and Th inputs to the LA. They show that by delivering HFS of the Ctx input, LTP can be observed at Th-LA inputs which is accompanied by long-lasting memory effects.

Strengths:

Overall, the study addresses an important scientific question and could potentially result in a very valuable contribution to the field. The combination of in vivo electrophysiology with optogenetic manipulations of individual input sources to the LA is attractive.

Weaknesses:

While the methods employed in this study are attractive, they are also associated with major weaknesses. In particular, the manuscript lacks convincing validation and sufficient controls. Specific comments are included in the "Recommendations for the authors" section.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

Information transfer between the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex is thought to be critical for spatial working memory, but most of the prior evidence for this hypothesis is correlational. This study attempts to test this causally by linking trial start times to theta-band coherence between these two structures. The authors find that trials initiated during periods of high coherence led to a dramatic improvement in performance. This applied not only to a spatial working memory task, but also to a cue-guided navigation task, suggesting that coherence in these regions may be a signature of a heightened attentional or preparatory state. The authors supplement this behavioral result with electrophysiological recordings to test whether the ventral midline thalamus is likely to mediate hippocampal-prefrontal coherence.

Strengths:

This study demonstrates a striking behavioral effect; by changing the moment at which a trial is initiated, performance on a spatial working memory task improves dramatically, from around 80% correct to over 90% correct. A smaller but nonetheless robust increase in accuracy was also seen in a texture discrimination task. Therefore, prefrontal-hippocampal synchronization in the theta band may not only be important for spatial navigation but may also be associated with improved performance in a range of tasks. If these results can be replicated using noninvasive EEG, it would open up a powerful avenue for modulating human behavior.

Weaknesses:

Ventral midline thalamic nuclei, such as reuniens, have reciprocal projections to both the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus and are therefore well-situated to mediate theta-band interactions between these structures. However, alternative mechanisms cannot be ruled out by the results of this study. For example, theta rhythms are globally coherent across the rodent hippocampus, and the ventral hippocampus projects directly to the prefrontal cortex. Theta propagation may depend on this pathway, and may only be passively inherited by VMT.

The optogenetic manipulations are intended to show that theta in VMT propagates to PFC and also affects HPC-PFC coherence. However, the "theta" induced by driving thalamic neurons at 7 Hz is extremely artificial. To demonstrate that VMT is causally involved in coordinating activity across HPC and PFC, it would have been better to optogenetically inhibit, rather than excite, these nuclei. If the authors were able to show that the natural occurrence of theta in PFC depends on activity in VMT, that would be a much more convincing test of their hypothesis.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

A number of previous reports have demonstrated that theta synchrony between the hippocampus (HPC) and prefrontal cortex (PFC) is associated with correct performance on spatial working memory tasks. The main goal of the current study is to examine this relationship by initiating trials either randomly (as is typically done) or during periods of high or low PFC-HPC coherence. To this end, they develop a 'brain-machine interface' (BMI) that provides real-time estimates of PFC-HPC theta coherence, which are then used to control trial onset using an automated figure-eight maze. Their main finding is that choice accuracy is significantly higher on trials initiated when theta coherence is high whereas performance on low coherence trials does not differ from randomly initiated control trials. They also observe a similar result using a non-working memory task in the same maze.

Overall the main experiments (Figures 1-4) are well designed and the BMI approach is convincingly validated. There are also appropriate controls and analyses to rule out behavioral confounds and the results clearly presented. The idea of triggering trial onset based on brain activity is an interesting idea and helps to examine how extremes in the distribution of brain states are associated with behavior, something that might be more difficult to examine if trials are initiated randomly. As such, the BMI is an interesting approach for studying the neuronal basis of behavior that could potentially be applied beyond the particular field of the study, something the authors could perhaps have elaborated on more.

That being said, although the authors have elegantly revealed an association between PFC-HPC theta synchrony and behavior using their BMI approach, it is not apparent whether these results add substantially to previous reports of similar associations, including from the author's own work. The authors sometimes seem to claim that they do; for example, in the discussion, after describing previous studies that reported an association between PFC-HPC theta synchrony and behavior, they raise the reasonable question "did mPFC-hippocampal theta coherence lead to, or coincide with, correct choice outcomes?" What they subsequently write gives the impression that their study has somehow addressed the question, whereas in fact their results still leave this question open. For example, it is entirely possible that during high-coherence trials an unobserved neural process is influencing both coherence and task performance. The authors could have made a more convincing case as to why their correlative results go beyond similar findings from previous studies, perhaps by including additional analysis to strengthen their case.

Sometimes, the authors also seem to suggest that their results establish a causal relationship between synchrony and behavior, for example when they say that they have "demonstrated for the first time that strong mPFC-hippocampal theta coherence ENHANCES memory-guided choice" (line 557, my emphasis). However, causal manipulations of PFC-HPC synchrony would be required to make such claims. I am not suggesting that the lack of such data is necessarily a weakness of the study, only that causal claims are not supported by the author's results.

In addition to the behavioral results described above, the authors also examine how HPC-PFC synchrony modulates synchrony with the ventromedial thalamus (VMT; Figure 5) and how optogenetic modulation of the VMT influences PFC-HPC synchrony (Figure 6). However, these results feel somewhat more preliminary and their relationship to the other findings in the manuscript is not always clear. For example, given that the authors demonstrate that "Prefrontal-hippocampal theta synchronization modulates prefrontal-thalamic interactions" (Figure 5) I would rather have expected the authors to manipulate HPC and/or PFC and see how this affects VMT in Figure 6. It is also difficult to draw strong conclusions about the effects of optogenetic VMT stimulation since the results presented by the authors come from only 2 rats (Figure 6D-K) and therefore feel somewhat anecdotal. I could also not find any statistical test supporting the increase in the proportion of phase-locked neurons during high theta states shown in Figure 5K.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Stout et al investigate the link between prefrontal-hippocampal (PFC-HPC) theta-band coherence and accurate decision-making in spatial decision-making tasks. Previous studies show that PFC-HPC theta coherence positively correlates with learning of these tasks and correct decisions but the nature of this relation relies on correlations that cannot show whether coherence leads, coincides, or is a consequence of decision making. To investigate more precisely this link, the authors devise a novel paradigm. In this paradigm, the rat is blocked during a delay period preceding its choice and they control on a trial-by-trial basis the level of PFC-HPC theta coherence prior to the decision by allowing the rat to access the choice point only at a time when coherence reaches above or below a threshold. The design of the paradigm is very nicely controlled thanks in particular to the trial-by-trial matching of delay period durations which is crucial for the working memory task. Moreover, the behaviour of the animal is strongly similar during high and low coherence periods which bolsters the specificity of the author's interpretation. Thanks to this approach, the authors clearly demonstrate that high theta coherence prior to choice-making is strongly predictive of better decision-making both in working memory and a cue-guided version of the task.

This novel paradigm provides an improvement in the level of experimental control to analyse the coherence/choice link but the exact interpretation of the results it yields is not entirely clear in the current manuscript. Using the PFC-HPC theta coherence during the delay period to the gate when the rat accesses the choice zone clearly separates this coherence from the behavioural decision itself. This provides convincing support for the idea that PFC-HPC theta coherence prior to the behavioural decision is related to correct decision-making and is not simply temporally coincidental or a consequence of the decision output. It does not however substantially increase the weight of evidence in favour of a causal link between theta coherence and correct decisions as suggested in the abstract ("PFC-HPC theta synchronization leads to correct choices"). Indeed, the paradigm does not de-correlate PFC-HPC theta synchronization from other neurophysiological variables such as neuromodulation, arousal, synchrony with other areas, etc that could be playing the true causal role in modulating decision-making.

The question of the link between the manuscript's findings and causal involvement of PFC-HPC dialogue is interestingly highlighted by the author's unexpected result showing that their paradigm reveals a link between theta coherence even in a sensory-driven version of the task. As the authors point out, results based on muscimol inhibition have shown that neither PFC nor HPC, nor the ventral midline thalamus, that mediates communication between the two, are involved in this task. This raises the question of why coherence between two areas is predictive of choice accuracy when neither area appears to be causally involved. The manuscript does not discuss the possibility that these results could imply that theta coherence is not in fact a good causal indicator. As an illustrative example, it could be linked for example with neuromodulation (ie dopamine, see Benchenane et al, 2010) which itself causally modifies the choice process. In this case, coherence would be an excellent predictor of accuracy (as the authors show) without implying a causally important information exchange between the two regions, since inhibiting these regions is without effect.

Altogether, this novel paradigm provides finer control to analyse the role of theta coherence in behaviour. This allows pinpointing of interesting cases in which coherence increases during correct task performance although it may have at least an indirect causal role. This opens up the possibility of interrogating when inter-area synchrony is associated with information transfer and when this information is then used to drive behavioural decisions.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

This is a descriptive study of membrane excitability and Na+ and K+ current amplitudes of sympathetic motor neurons in culture. The main findings of the study are that neurons isolated from aged animals show increased membrane excitability manifested as increased firing rates in response to electrical stimulation and changes in related membrane properties including depolarized resting membrane potential, increased rheobase, and spontaneous firing. By contrast, neuron cultures from young mice show little to no spontaneous firing and relatively low firing rates in response to current injection. These changes in excitability correlate with significant reductions in the magnitude of KCNQ currents in aged neurons compared to young neurons. Treating cultures with the immunosuppressive drug, rapamycin, which has known antiaging effects in model animals appears to reverse the firing rates in aged neurons and enhance KCNQ current. The authors conclude that aging promotes hyperexcitability of sympathetic motor neurons.

The electrophysiological cataloging of the neuronal properties is generally well done, and the experiments are performed using perforated patch recordings which preserve the internal constituents of neurons, providing confidence that the effects seen are not due to washout of regulators from the cells. The main weakness is that this study is a descriptive tabulation of changes in the electrophysiology of neurons in culture, and the effects shown are correlative rather than establishing causality. It is difficult to know from the data presented whether the changes in KCNQ channels are in fact directly responsible for the observed changes in membrane excitability. Furthermore, a notable omission seems to be the analysis of Ca2+ currents which have been widely linked to alterations in membrane properties in aging. As well, additional experiments in slice cultures would provide greater significance on the potential relevance of the findings for intact preparations. Finally, experiments using KCNQ blockers and activators could provide greater relevance that the observed changes in KCNQ are indeed connected to changes in membrane excitability.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors study age-related changes in the excitability and firing properties of sympathetic neurons, which they ascribe to age-related changes in the expression of KCNQ (Kv7, "M-type") K+ currents in rodent sympathetic neurons, whose regulation by GPCRs has been most thoroughly studied for over 40 years. The authors suggest the ingestion of rapamycin may partially reverse the age-related decrease in M-channel expression. With the rapamycin part included, it is unclear how this work will impact the field of age-related neuronal dysfunction, as the mechanistic information is not strong.

Strengths:<br /> The strengths include the rigor of the current-clamp and voltage-clamp experiments, the lovely, crisp presentation of the data, and the expert statistics. The separation of neurons into tonic, phasic, and adapting classes is also interesting, and informative. The writing is also elegant, and crisp. The above is especially true of the manuscript up until the part dealing with the effects of rapamycin, which becomes less compelling.

Weaknesses:<br /> Where the manuscript becomes less compelling is in the rapamycin section, which does not provide much in the way of mechanistic insights. As such, the effect is more of an epi-phenomenon of unclear insight, and the authors cannot ascribe a signaling mechanism to it that is supported by data. Thus, this latter part rather undermines the overall impact and central advance of the manuscript. The problem is exacerbated by the controversial and anecdotal nature of the entire mTor/aging field, some of whose findings have very unfortunately had to be recently retracted.

I would strongly recommend to the authors that they end the manuscript with their analysis of the role of M current/KCNQ channels in the numerous age-related changes in sympathetic neuron function that they elegantly report, and save the rapamycin, and possible mTor action, for a separate line of inquiry that the authors could develop in a more thorough and scholarly way.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This research shows compelling and detailed evidence showing that aging influences intrinsic membrane properties of peripheral sympathetic motor neurons such that they become more excitable. Furthermore, the authors present convincing evidence that the oral administration of the anti-aging drug Rapamycin partially reversed hyperexcitability in aged neurons. This study also investigates the molecular mechanisms underlying age-associated hyperexcitability in mouse sympathetic motor neurons. In that regard, the authors found an age-associated reduction of an outward current having properties similar to KCNQ2/Q3 potassium current. They suggested a reduction of KCNQ2/Q3 current density in aged neurons as a potential mechanism behind their overactivity.

Strengths:<br /> Detailed and rigorous analysis of electrical responses of peripheral sympathetic motor neurons using electrophysiology (perforated patch and whole-cell recordings). Most of the conclusions of this paper are well supported by the data.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1) The identity of the age-associated reduced current as KCNQ2/Q3 is not corroborated by pharmacology (blocking the current with the specific blocker XE-991).<br /> 2) The manuscript does not include a direct test of the reduction of KCNQ current as the mechanism behind age-induced hyperexcitability.

Joint Public Review:

In the present manuscript, Abele et al use Salmonella strains modified to robustly induce one of two different types of regulated cell death, pyroptosis or apoptosis in all cell types to assess the role of pyroptosis versus apoptosis in systemic versus intestinal epithelial pathogen clearance. They demonstrate that in systemic spread, which requires growth in macrophages, pyroptosis is required to eliminate Salmonella, while in intestinal epithelial cells (IEC), extrusion of the infected cell into the intestinal lumen induced by apoptosis or pyroptosis is sufficient for early pathogen restriction. The methods used in these studies are thorough and well controlled and lead to robust results, that mostly support the conclusions. The impact on the field is considered minor as the observations are somewhat redundant with previous observations and and not generalizable due to cited evidence of different outcomes in other models of infection and a relatively artificial study system that does not permit the assessment of later timepoints in infection due to rapid clearance. This excludes the study of later effects of differences between pyroptosis and apoptosis in IEC such as i.e. IL-18 and eicosanoid release, which are only observed in the former and can have effects later in infection.

Joint Public Review:

In this manuscript, Kipfer et al describe a method for a fast and accurate SARS-CoV2 rescue and mutagenesis. This work is based on a published method termed ISA (infectious subgenomic amplicons), in which partially overlapping DNA fragments covering the entire viral genome and additional 5' and 3' sequences are transfected into mammalian cell lines. These DNA fragments recombine in the cells, express the full length viral genomic RNA and launch replication and rescue of infectious virus.

CLEVER, the method described here significantly improves on the ISA method to generate infectious SARS-CoV2, making it widely useful to the virology community.

Specifically, the strengths of this method are:<br /> 1) The successful use of various cell lines and transfection methods.<br /> 2) Generation of a four-fragment system, which significantly improves the method efficiency due to lower number of required recombination events.<br /> 3) Flexibility in choice of overlapping sequences, making this system more versatile.<br /> 4) The authors demonstrated how this system can be used to introduce point mutations as well as insertion of a tag and deletion of a viral gene.<br /> 5) Fast-tracking generation of infectious virus directly from RNA of clinical isolates by RT-PCR, without the need for cloning the fragments or using synthetic sequences.<br /> 6) The authors further expanded this method to work on additional plus-strand RNA viruses beyond SARS-CoV-2 (CHIKV, DENV)

The manuscript clearly presents the findings, and the proof-of-concept experiments are well designed.

Overall, this is a very useful method for SARS-CoV2 research. Importantly, it can be applicable to many other viruses, speeding up the response to newly emerging viruses than threaten the public health.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This manuscript provides important evidence on the association between sleep regularity and mortality in the UK Biobank, which is a popular topic in recent sleep and circadian research in population-based studies. The analysis reported robust associations between sleep irregularity and increased total, CVD and cancer mortality, and provided evidence to support the role of sleep and circadian health in disease progression and longevity in human populations. The Sleep Regularity Index (SRI) used in this study is a novel metric that quantifies the consistency in rest-activity rhythms over consecutive 24 hour periods, thus providing objective assessment of potential circadian disruption. The study is based on a large accelerometer study with validated follow-up of incident diseases and deaths. The data quality and large sample size strengthen the credibility of the conclusion. Overall, the analyses are appropriately done and the manuscript is clearly written.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This interesting research commendably revealed irregular sleep-wake patterns are associated with higher mortality risk. However, as authors acknowledged, the analysis can not to accurately identify the cause and effect. In my opinion, the causality is important for this topic, cuz, sleep regularity and health (e.g. chronic disease) were long-term simultaneous status. especially given the participants are older. I suggest that the author could utilize MR analysis to find out for more evidence.

Joint Public Review:

In this study by Porter et al reports on outcomes from a small, open-label, pilot randomized clinical trial comparing dornase-alfa to the best available care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. As the number of randomized participants is small, investigators describe also a contemporary cohort of controls and the study concludes about decrease of inflammation (reflected by CRP levels) after 7 days of treatment but no other statistically significant clinical benefit.

Suggestions to the authors:

• Please re-analyze findings by omitting from all Tables and Figures all data of comparators who were not randomized (BAC). I understand the difficulties of running this trial but the results of excess reduction of mortality do not allow the publication of a trial where comparators do not come from the randomized patient population.<br /> • The presentation remains confusing and the manuscript should be critically revised for clarity. There is a repetition of methods (e.g. lines 176-187 repeat 160-175) and redundant results (e.g. Figure S2, Table 3). At Table 4: the authors should select one method of illustration for lab results, either Table or figure, without repetitions<br /> • Regarding inclusion criteria, it is unclear whether high radiological suspicion is sufficient for inclusion or whether PCR based confirmation is required in all instances (differences in wording between lines 153 and 191), and under which oxygen requirements (lines 155 and 192)<br /> • Table 1 should be merged with Table S2 and a better description of cohort baseline severity (P/F, SOFA, APACHE, organ support, number of patients in each point of the WHO severity score) and treatments should be made available

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The manuscript by Hage et al. presents interesting results from a foraging behavior in Marmosets that explores the interactions of saccade and lick vigor with pupil dilation and performance as well as a marginal value theory and foraging theory-inspired value-based decision-making model thereof. The results are generally robust and carefully presented and analyses, particularly of vigor, are carefully executed.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Hage et al examine how the foraging behavior of marmoset monkeys in a laboratory setting systematically takes into account the reward value and anticipated effort cost associated with the acquisition and consumption of food. In an interesting comprehensive framework, the authors study how experimental and natural variation of these factors affect both the decisions and actions necessary to gather and accumulate food, as well as the actions necessary to consume the food.

The manuscript proposes a computational model of how the monkeys may guide all these aspects of behavior, by maximizing a food capture rate that trades off the food that can be gathered with the effort and duration of the underlying actions. They use this model to derive qualitative predictions for how monkeys should react to an increase in the effort associated with food consumption: Monkeys should work longer before deciding to consume the accumulated food, but should move more slowly. The model also predicts that monkeys should show a different reaction to an increase in reward value of the food, also working longer but moving faster. The authors test these predictions in an interesting experimental setup that requires monkeys to collect small increments of food rewards for successful eye movements to targets. The monkeys can decide freely when to interrupt work and consume the accumulated food, and the authors measure the speed of the eye movements involved in the food acquisition as well as the tongue movements involved in the food consumption.

By and large, the behavioral findings fall in line with the qualitative model predictions: When the effort involved in food consumption increases, monkeys collect more food before deciding to consume it, and they move slower both during food acquisition and food consumption. In a second test, the authors approximate the effects of reward value of the food at stake, by comparing monkey behavior during different days with natural variations in body weight. These quasi-experimental increases in the reward value of food also lead to longer work times before consumption, but to faster movements during food consumption. Finally, the authors show that these effects correlate with pupil size, with pupils dilating more for low-effort foraging actions with increased saccade speed and decreased work duration. The authors conclude that the effort associated with anticipated actions can lead to changes in global brain state that simultaneously affect decisions and action vigor.

The paper proposes an interesting model for how one unified action policy may simultaneously affect multiple types of decisions and movements involved in foraging. The methods employed to measure behavior and test these predictions are generally sound, and the paper is well written.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this research article, the authors utilized the zebrafish embryo to explore the idea that two different cell types emerge with different morphodynamics from the floor of the dorsal aorta based on their apicobasal polarity establishment. The hypothesis that the apical-luminal polarity of the membrane could be maintained after EHT and confer different functionality to the cell is exciting, however, this could not be established. There is a general lack of data supporting several of the main statements and conclusions. In addition, the manuscript is difficult to follow and needs refinement. We present below some questions and suggestions with the goal of guiding the authors to improve the manuscript and solidify their findings.

Strengths:<br /> New transgenic zebrafish lines developed. Challenging imaging.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1. The authors conclude that the truncated version of Podxl2 fused to a fluorophore is enriched within the apical site of the cell. However, based on the images provided, an alternative interpretation is that the portion of the membrane within the apical side is less stretched than in the luminal side, and therefore the fluorophore is more concentrated and easier to identify by confocal. This alternative interpretation is also supported by data presented later in the paper where the authors demonstrate that the early HE is not polarized (membranes are not under tension and stretched yet). Could the authors confirm their interpretation with a different technique/marker like TEM?

2. Could the authors confirm that the engulfed membranes are vacuoles as they claimed, using, for example, TEM? Why is it concluded that "these vacuoles appear to emanate from the abluminal membrane (facing the sub-aortic space) and not from the lumen?" This is not clear from the data presented.

3. It is unclear why the authors conclude that "their dynamics appears to depend on the activity of aquaporins and it is very possible that aquaporins are active in zebrafish too, although rather in EHT cells late in their emergence and/or in post-EHT cells, for water chase and vacuolar regression as proposed in our model (Figure 1 - figure supplement 1B)." In our opinion, these figures do not confirm this statement.

4. Could the authors prove and show data for their conclusions "We observed that both EHT pol+ and EHT pol- cells divide during the emergence"; "both EHT pol+ and EHT pol- cells express reporters driven by the hematopoietic marker CD41 (data not shown), which indicates that they are both endowed with hematopoietic potential"; and "the full recovery of their respective morphodynamic characteristics (not shown)?".

5. The authors do not demonstrate the conclusion traced from Fig. 2B. Is there a fusion of the vacuoles to the apical side in the EHT pol+ cells? Do the cells inheriting less vacuoles result in pol- EHT? It looks like the legend for Fig. 2-fig supp is missing.

6. The title of the paper "Tuning apico-basal polarity and junctional recycling in the hemogenic endothelium orchestrates pre-hematopoietic stem cell emergence complexity" could be interpreted as functional heterogeneity within the HSCs, which is not demonstrated in this work. A more conservative title denoting that there are two types of EHT from the DA could avoid misinterpretations and be more appropriate.

7. There are several conclusions not supported by data: "Finally, we have estimated that the ratio between EHT pol+ and EHT pol- cells is of approximately 2/1". "We observed that both EHT pol+ and EHT pol- cells divide during the emergence and remain with their respective morphological characteristics". "We also observed that both EHT pol+ and EHT pol- cells express reporters driven by the hematopoietic marker CD41 (data not shown), which indicates that they are both endowed with hematopoietic potential." These conclusions are key in the paper, and therefore they should be supported by data.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this study, Torcq and colleagues make careful observations of the cellular morphology of haemogenic endothelium undergoing endothelial to haematopoietic transition (EHT) to become stem cells, using the zebrafish model. To achieve this, they used an extensive array of transgenic lines driving fluorescent markers, markers of apico-basal polarity (podocalixin-FP fusions), or tight junction markers (jamb-FP fusions). The use of the runx truncation to block native Runx1 only in endothelial cells is an elegant tool to achieve something akin to tissue-specific deletion of Runx1. Overall, the imaging data is of excellent quality. They demonstrate that differences in apico-basal polarity are strongly associated with different cellular morphologies of cells undergoing EHT from HE (EHT pol- and EHT pol+) which raises the exciting possibility that these morphological differences reflect the heterogeneity of HE (and therefore HSCs) at a very early stage. They then overexpress a truncated form of Runx1 (just the runt domain) to block Runx1 function and show that more HE cells abort EHT and remain associated with the embryonic dorsal aorta. They identify pard3aa and pard3ab as potential regulators of cell polarity. However, despite showing that loss of runx1 function leads to (late) decreases in the expression of these genes, no evidence for their role in EHT is presented. The FRAP experiments and the 2d-cartography, albeit very elegant, are difficult to interpret and not very clearly described throughout the text, making interpretation difficult for someone less familiar with the techniques. Finally, while it is clear that ArhGEF11 is playing an important role in defining cell shapes and junctions between cells during EHT, there is very little statistical evidence to support the limited data presented in the (very beautiful) images.

There is a sense that this work is both overwhelming in terms of the sheer amount of imaging data, and the work behind it to generate all the lines they required, and at the same time that there is very little evidence supporting the assertion that pard3 (and even ArhGEF11) are important mediators of cell morphology and cell fate in the context of EHT. For instance, the pard3 expression data, and levels after blocking runx1 (part of Figure 3 and Figure 4) don't particularly add to the manuscript beyond indicating that the pard3 genes are regulated by Runx1.

Weaknesses<br /> The writing style is quite convoluted and could be simplified for clarity. For example, there is plenty of discussion and speculation throughout the presentation of the results. A clearer separation of the results from this speculation/discussion would help with understanding. Figures are frequently presented out of order in the text; modifying the figures to accommodate the flow of the text (or the other way around) - would make it much easier to follow the narrative. While the evidence for the different cellular morphologies of cells undergoing EHT is strong, the main claim (or at least the title of the manuscript) that tuning apico-basal polarity and junctional recycling orchestrate stem cell emergence complexity is not well supported by the data.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary<br /> This work investigates how multiple regulatory elements combine to regulate gene expression. The authors use an episomal reporter assay which measures the transcriptional output of the reporter under the regulation of an enhancer-enhancer-promoter triple. The authors test all combinations of 8 promoters and 59 enhancers in this assay. The main finding is that enhancer pairs generally combine additively on reporter output. The authors also find that the extent to which enhancers increase reporter output is inversely related to the intrinsic strength of the promoter.

This manuscript presents a compact experiment that investigates an important open question in gene regulation. The results and data will be of interest to researchers studying enhancers. Given that my expertise is in modeling and computation, I will take the experimental results at face value and focus my review on the interpretation of the results and the computational methodology. I find the result of additivity between enhancers to be well supported. The findings on differential responsiveness between promoters are very interesting but the interpretation of such responses as 'non-linear' or 'following a power-law' may be misleading. More broadly, I think a more rigorous description of the mathematical methodology would increase the clarity and accessibility of this manuscript. A major unanswered question is whether the findings in this study apply to enhancers in their native genomic context. Regardless, investigating such questions in an episomal reporter assay is valuable.

Main comments<br /> Applicability to native genomic context: The applicability of the results in this paper to enhancers in their native genomic context is unclear. As the authors state in the discussion section, the reporter gene is not integrated into the genome, the spacing between enhancers does not match their native context etc. It is thus unclear whether this experimental design is able to detect the non-additivity between enhancers which is known to be present in the genome. This could be investigated by testing the enhancer-enhancer-promoter tuples for which non-additivity has been observed in the genome (references are given in the introduction) in this assay.

Interpretation of promoter responses as non-linear and following a power-law: In Fig 5, the authors demonstrate that enhancer-enhancer pairs boost reporter output more for weak promoters as opposed to strong promoters. I agree the data supports this finding, but I find the interpretation of such data as promoters scaling enhancers according to a power-law (as stated in the abstract) to be misleading. As mentioned on line 297, it is not possible to define an intrinsic measure of enhancer strength, thus the authors assign the base of the power-law to be the average boost index of the enhancer-enhancer pair across the 8 promoters. But this measure incorporates some aspect of a promoter and is not solely a property of enhancers. It would also be useful to know whether the results in Fig 5 apply to only enhancer-enhancer-promoter triples or also to enhancer-promoter pairs.

Enhancer-promoter selectivity: As a follow-up to a previous study (Martinez-Ara et al, Molecular Cell 2022) the authors mention that the data in this study also shows that enhancers show selectivity for certain promoters. The authors mention that both studies use the same statistical methodology and the data in this study is consistent with the data from the 2022 paper. However, I think the statistical methodology in both studies needs further exposition. This section of the review is thus meant to ensure that I understand the author's methodology, to guide the reader in understanding how the authors define 'selectivity', and to probe certain assumptions underlying the methodology.

My understanding of the approach is as follows: The authors consider an enhancer to be not selective if its 'boost index' is the same across a set of promoters. 'Boost index' is defined to be the ratio of the reporter output with the enhancer and promoter divided by the reporter output with just the promoter. Conceptually, I think that considering the boost index is a reasonable way to quantify selectivity.

The authors use a frequentist approach to classify each enhancer as selective or not selective. The null hypothesis is that the boost index of the enhancer is equal across a set of promoters. This can be visualized in Fig. 2C where the null hypothesis is that the mean of each vertical distribution is equal. Note that in Figure S4 of this paper (and in Figure 4B of their 2022 paper) the within-group variance is not plotted. Statistical significance is assessed using a Welch F-test. This is a parametric test that assumes that the observations within each vertical distribution in Fig 2C are normally distributed (this test does allow for heteroskedasticity - which means that the variance may differ within each vertical distribution). Does the normality assumption hold? This analysis should be reported. If this assumption does not hold, is the Welch test well calibrated?

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This manuscript by Martinez-Ara et al investigates how combinations of cis-regulatory elements combine to influence gene expression. Using a clever iteration on massively parallel reporter assays (MPRAs), the authors measure the combinatorial effects of pairs of enhancers on specific promoters. Specifically, they assayed the activity of 59x59 different enhancer-enhancer (E-E) combinations on 8 different promoters in mouse embryonic stem cells. The main claims of the paper are that E-E pairs combine nearly additively, and that supra-additive E-E pairs are rare and often promoter-dependent. The data in this study generally support these claims.

This paper makes a good contribution to the ongoing discussions about the selectivity of gene regulatory elements. Recent works, such as those by Martinez-Ara et al. and Burgman et al., have indicated limited selectivity between E-P pairs on plasmid-based assays; this paper adds another layer to that by suggesting a similar lack of selectivity between E-E pairs.

An interesting result in this manuscript is the observation that weak promoters allow more supra-additive E-E interactions than strong promoters (Figure 4b). This nonlinear promoter response to enhancers aligns with the model previously proposed in Hong et al. (from my own group), which posited that core promoter activities are nonlinearly scaled by the genomic environment, and that (similar to the trend observed in Figure 5b) the steepness of the scaling is negatively correlated with promoter strength.

My only suggestion for the authors is that they include more plots showing how much the intrinsic strengths of the promoters and enhancers they are working with explain the trends in their data.

Specific Suggestions<br /> Supplementary Figure 4 is presented as evidence for selectivity between single enhancers and promoters. Could the authors inspect the relationship between enhancer/promoter strength and this selectivity? Generating plots similar to Figure 4B and Figure 5B, but for single enhancers, should show if the ability of an enhancer to boost a promoter is inversely correlated to that promoter's intrinsic strength. Also, in Supplementary Figure 4, coloring each point by promoter type would clarify if certain promoters (the weak ones) consistently show higher boost indices across all enhancers. If they do not, the authors may want to speculate how single enhancers can show selectivity for promoters while the effect of adding a second enhancer to an existing E-P has little selectivity. An alternate explanation, based solely on the strength of the elements, would be that when the expression of a gene is low the addition of enhancer(s) has large effects, but when the expression of a gene is high (closer to saturation) the addition of enhancer(s) have small effects.

Can anything more be said about the enhancers in E-E-P combinations that exhibit supra-additivity? Specifically, it would be interesting to know if certain enhancers, e.g. strong enhancers or enhancers with certain motifs, are more likely to show supra-additivity with a given promoter.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In the revised manuscript presented by Chen, Wang, and coworkers, the authors examine two proteins, STEAP1 and STEAP2, which are transmembrane hemoproteins that are involved in Fe and Cu homeostasis and are implicated in certain cancer states. The authors produce recombinant forms of STEAP1 and STEAP2 and attempt to reconstruct the electron-transport chains of both; under certain conditions, the electron transport chain of STEAP2 consists of an internal reductase domain that binds NADPH and transfers electrons to an internal FAD molecule prior to the heme b, while STEAP1 can use an independent/external b5 reductase instead of an intrinsic reductase domain to accomplish the same electron transport pathway. A strong feature of this manuscript is the determination of the cryo-EM structure of the human STEAP2 protein resolved to 3.2 Å globally and bound to heme, FAD (in an extended conformation), and NADP+/NADPH.

This revised study aims to address the previous weaknesses that were noted, such as the unclear presentation of the kinetics data, the lack of determined redox couples, the lack of in vivo oligomerization verification, and some minor weaknesses such as the fit of the BLI data and the exact redox states of the bound coenzymes. In general, the authors have sought to rectify these weaknesses chiefly through textual edits. Through these revisions, the kinetics data are now better presented and may be more easily interpreted by the reader, how the samples for cryo-EM were prepared with the respective coenzymes is clearer, and a comparison between the oligomerization of STEAP2 and STEAP4 suggests conservation of oligomerization. The determination of the redox potentials of the hemes in both STEAP1 and STEAP2 would still be a strong addition to the data presented, but it is recognized that the limitations in the ability to prepare sufficient quantities of recombinant enzyme limits the ability to determine the measurements and may represent another publication outside of the scope of this publication.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Human STEAPs form a family of transmembrane heme-bound proteins. They are implicated in cancer given their high expression levels in tumor cells. Previous work has revealed that STEAPs 1-4 are iron and copper reductases. The recent structure determination of STEAP1 and STEAP4 unveiled their trimeric arrangement. STEAP1 is an outlier because it lacks the cytosolic reductase domain present in STEAPs 2-5. The present work adds to our knowledge of the family. It reports on the cryoEM structure of STEAP2 that is similar to the known structures of STEAP4 and STEAP1. The structural analysis provides additional support to a FAD-dependent heme-reduction mechanism whereby FAD oscillates between two conformations. The excellent kinetics experiments show that STEAP1 can be promiscuous regarding the source of electron donors that it can use. Indeed, cytochrome b5 can directly reduce the heme prosthetic group of STEAP1 thereby establishing an electron transfer chain that conveys electrons from NADP(P)H to the extracellular iron. Remarkably, STEAP1 can also accept electrons from free reduced FAD. Most interestingly, the manuscript demonstrates that STEAP2 can be a source of reduced FAD so that STEAP2 can create the reducing power needed for its own activity and the activity of STEAP1. This work further convincingly shows that STEAP1 can reduce iron whereas STEAP2 is less effective in iron reduction. The manuscript indicates that STEAP2 might accept other substrates providing a hint about the distinct biochemical and physiological roles of the STEAP paralogs. The manuscript does not address this point that remains open for further investigations. Aside from this minor weakness, the manuscript will advance the fields of STEAP and iron biochemistry. It has benefited from the advice given by the Reviewers leading to a high-quality presentation and data analysis.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of the prostate (STEAP) family comprises four members in metazoans. STEAP1 was identified as integral membrane protein highly upregulated on the plasma membrane of prostate cancer cells (PMID: 10588738), and it later became evident that other STEAP proteins are also over expressed in cancers, making STEAPs potential therapeutic targets (PMID: 22804687). Functionally, STEAP2-4 are ferric and cupric reductases that are important for maintaining cellular metal uptake (PMIDs: 16227996, 16609065). The cellular function of STEAP1 remains unknown, as it cannot function as an independent metalloreductase. In the last years, structural and functional data have revealed that STEAPs form trimeric assemblies and that they transport electrons from intracellular NADPH, through membrane bound FAD and heme cofactors, to extracellular metal ions (PMIDs: 23733181, 26205815, 30337524). In addition, numerous studies (including a previous study from the senior authors) have provided strong implications for a potential metalloreductase function of STEAP1 (PMIDs: 27792302, 32409586).

This new study by Chen et al. aims to further characterize the previously established electron transport chain in STEAPs in high molecular detail through a variety of assays. This is a well-performed study that provides new insights into the established mechanism of electron transport in STEAP proteins. The authors first perform a detailed spectroscopic analysis of STEAP1, and present the interesting observation that STEAP1 can receive electrons from cytochrome b5 reductase. Then, a similar spectroscopic analysis is performed on another STEAP family member, STEAP2, followed by experiments that show how reduced FAD can diffuse from STEAP2 to STEAP1 to reduce the heme of STEAP1. Finally, the cryo-EM structure of STEAP2 is presented.

Experimentally, the conclusions are appropriate and consistent with the experimental data. The observation that STEAP1 can form an electron transfer chain with cytochrome b5 reductase in vitro is an exciting finding, but its physiological relevance remains to be validated. The metalloreductase activity of STEAP1 in vitro has been described previously by the authors and by others (PMIDs: 27792302, 32409586). However, when over expressed in HEK cells, STEAP1 by itself does not display metal ion reductase activity (PMID: 16609065), and it was also found that STEAP1 over expression does not impact iron uptake and reduction in Ewing's sarcoma (cancer) cells (PMID: 22080479). Therefore, the physiological relevance of metal ion reduction by STEAP1 remains controversial. Future studies will have to elucidate if the established interaction between STEAP1 and cytochrome b5 reductase is relevant in cells.

The work will be interesting for scientists working within the STEAP field and for those working on other oxidoreductases. The spectroscopic data is robust and However, the new structural insights into STEAP2 are limited because the structure is virtually identical to the published structures of STEAP4 and STEAP1 (PMIDs: 30337524, 32409586), which is not surprising because of the high sequence similarity between the STEAP isoforms. When taken together, this study by Chen et al. strengthens and supports previously published biochemical and structural data on STEAP proteins, making an important contribution to the STEAP field.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Deng et al. investigate, for the first time to my knowledge, the role that hippocampal dentate gyrus mossy cells play in Fragile X Syndrome. They provide strong evidence that, in slice preparations from Fmr1 knockout mice, mossy cells are hypoactive due to increased Kv7 function whereas granule cells are hyperactive compared to slices from wild-type mice. They provide indirect evidence that the weakness of mossy cell-interneuron connections contributes to granule cell hyperexcitability, despite converse adaptations to mossy cell inputs. The authors show that application of the Kv7 inhibitor XE991 is able to rescue granule cell hyperexcitability back to wild-type baseline, supporting the overall conclusion that inhibition of Kv7 in the dentate may be a potential therapeutic approach for Fragile X Syndrome. However, any claims regarding specific circuit-based intervention or analysis are limited by the exclusively pharmacological approach of the manipulations.

Strengths:<br /> Thorough electrophysiological characterization of mossy cells in Fmr1 knockout mice, a novel finding.

Their electrophysiological approach is quite rigorous: patched different neuron types (GC, MC, INs) one at a time within the dentate gyrus in FMR1 KO and WT, with and without 'circuit blockade' by pharmacologically inhibiting neurotransmission. This allows the most detailed characterization possible of passive membrane/intrinsic cell differences in the dentate gyrus of Fmr1 knockout mice.

Provide several examples showing the use of Kv7 inhibitor XE991 is able to rescue excitability of granule cell circuit in Fmr1 knockout mice (AP firing in the intact circuit, postsynaptic current recordings, theta-gamma coupling stimulation).

Weaknesses:<br /> The implications for these findings and the applicability of the potential treatment for the disorder in a whole animal are limited due to the fact that all experiments were done in slices.

The authors' interpretation of the word 'circuit-based' is problematic - there are no truly circuit-specific manipulations in this study due to the reliance on pharmacology for their manipulations. While the application of the Kv7 inhibitor may have a predominant effect on the circuit through changes to mossy cell excitability, this manipulation would affect many other cells within the dentate and adjacent brain regions that connect to the dentate that express Kv7 as well.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this work, the authors provide evidence to show that an increase in Kv7 channels in hilar mossy cells of Fmr1 knock out mice results in a marked decrease in their excitability. The reduction in excitatory drive onto local hilar interneurons produces an increased excitation/inhibition ratio in granule cells. Inhibiting Kv7 channels can help normalize the excitatory drive in this circuit, suggesting that they may represent a viable target for targeted therapeutics for fragile-x syndrome.

Strengths:<br /> The work is supported by a compelling and thorough set of electrophysiological studies. The authors do an excellent job of analysing their data and present a very complete data set.

Weaknesses:<br /> There are no significant weaknesses in the experimental work, however the complexity of the data presentation and the lack of a schematic showing the organizational framework of this circuit make the data less accessible to non-experts in the field. I highly encourage a graphical abstract and network diagram to help individuals understand the implications of this work.

The work is important as it identifies a unique regional and cell-specific abnormality in Fmr1 KO mice, showing how the loss of one gene can result in region-specific changes in brain circuits.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The paper by Deng, Kumar, Cavalli, Klyachko describes that, unlike in other cell types, loss of Fmr1 decreases the excitability of hippocampal mossy cells due to up-regulation of Kv7 currents. They also show evidence that while muting mossy cells appears to be a compensatory mechanism, it contributes to the higher activity of the dentate gyrus, because the removal of mossy cell output alleviates the inhibition of dentate principal cells. This may be important for the patho-mechanism in Fragile X syndrome caused by the loss of Fmr1.

These experiments were carefully designed, and the results are presented ‎in a very logical, insightful, and self-explanatory way. Therefore, this paper represents strong evidence for the claims of the authors. In the current state of the manuscript, there are only a few points that need additional explanation.

One of the results, which is shown in the supplementary dataset, does not fit the main conclusions. Changes in the mEPSC frequency suggest that in addition to the proposed network effects, there are additional changes in the synaptic machinery or synapse number that are independent of the actual activity of the neurons. Since the differences of the mEPSC and sEPSC frequencies are similar and because only the latter can signal network effects, while the former is typically interpreted as a presynaptic change, it cannot be claimed that sEPSC frequency changes are due to the hypo-excitability of mossy cells.

An apparent technical issue may imply a second weak point in the interpretation of the results. Because the IPSCs in the PP stimulation experiments (Fig 8) start within a few milliseconds, it is unlikely that its first ‎components originate from the PP-GC-MC-IN feedforward inhibitory circuit. The involvement of this circuit and MCs in the Kv7-dependent excitability changes is the main implication of the results of this paper. But this feedforward inhibition requires three consecutive synaptic steps and EPSP-AP couplings, each of them lasting for at least 1ms + 2-5ms. Therefore, the inhibition via the PP-GC-MC-IN circuit can be only seen from 10-20ms after PP stimulation. The earlier components of the cPSCs should originate from other circuit elements that are not related to the rest of the paper. Therefore, more isolated measurements on the cPSC recordings are needed ‎which consider only the later phase of the IPSCs. This can be either a measurement of the decay phase or a pharmacological manipulation that selectively enhances/inhibits a specific component of the proposed circuit.

I suggest refraining from the conclusions saying "‎MCs provide at least ~51% of the excitatory drive onto interneurons in WT and ~41% in KO mice", because too many factors (eg. IN cell types, slice condition, synaptic reliability) are not accounted for in these actual numbers, and these values are not necessary for the general observation of the paper.

There are additional minor issues about the presentation of the results.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this paper, the authors investigated the relationship between menopause (including status, type, and age of onset) with measures of brain health, including cognition, Alzheimer's disease (including age of onset), and structural brain imaging.

Strengths:<br /> A key strength is the use of propensity matching to address the confound of age. However, further clarification and justification regarding the study design, methodology, reporting, and discussion of the results is required.

Weaknesses:<br /> Overall, the strength of evidence is uncertain/incomplete, given the methodological limitations present in the design, analyses, and reporting of results. The findings are useful, however, much of the relevant literature in this area is missing and the findings have therefore not been appropriately contextualised nor compared with previous results, including those using the same dataset.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Costantino et al report on data from thousands of participants from the UK Biobank whereby they assessed relationships between menopausal status, menopause type (surgical or natural), and age at menopause with cognition, neuroanatomical measures derived from magnetic resonance imaging and Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk.

Strengths:<br /> This is a really important field of research. Alzheimer's disease is a leading cause of death in women and better understanding whether hormonal and brain changes associated with the menopause transition are contributing to this risk is a crucial research question. Access to such a large database, with cognitive assessment alongside structural MRI data, is a strength of this study. The authors report a positive association between earlier age of menopause as well as surgical menopause and a higher risk of developing AD. The authors also report associations between age at natural menopause and performances on various cognitive tests. Positive associations were found between the age of menopause and fluid intelligence, numeric memory, and pair matching.

Weaknesses:<br /> The manuscript would benefit from further clarification about the sample and descriptions of analyses. At the moment, it is difficult to determine whether the conclusions align with the results. In terms of the method, this is a cross-sectional analysis, with different subgroups selected depending on the research question and model. Some further clarification on the full sample and the participants selected for each analysis would be helpful. Some clarification on how menopause status and AD diagnosis were determined would be helpful. The results and discussion refer to menopause having an impact on specific cognitive tasks - the domains that these tasks assess would be worthy of some discussion.

Joint Public Review:

Summary:<br /> In this study, the authors seek to characterize the role of splicing factor SRSF1. Using a conditional deletion of Srsf1 in germ cells, they find that SRSF1 is required for male fertility. Via immunostaining and RNA-seq analysis of the Srsf1 conditional knockout (cKO) testes, combined with SRSF1 CLIP-seq and IP-MS data from the testis, they conclude that Srsf1 is required for homing of precursor spermatogonial stem cells (SCCs) due to alternative splicing of Tial1. They further show that spermatogonia-related genes (Plzf, Id4, Setdb1, Stra8, Tial1/Tiar, Bcas2, Ddx5, Srsf10, Uhrf1, and Bud31) were bound by SRSF1 in the mouse testes by CLIP-seq. They show that SRSF1 coordinates with other RNA splicing-related proteins to directly bind and regulate the expression of several spermatogonia-related genes, including Tial1/Tiar, via alternative splicing Ultimately, the study shows that SRSF1's effects on alternative splicing are required to establish spermatogenesis. In the absence of Srsf1, the postnatal gonocytes do not properly mature into spermatogonia and consequently never initiate spermatogenesis.

Strengths:<br /> This study shows a role of SRSF1-mediated alternative splicing in establishment and survival of precursor SSCs, which may provide a framework to elucidate the molecular mechanisms of the posttranscriptional network underlying the formation of SSC pools. The histological analysis of the Srsf1 cKO traces the origins of the fertility defect to the postnatal testis, and the authors have generated interesting CLIP-seq, IP-MS, and RNA-seq datasets characterizing SRSF1's RNA targets and interacting proteins specifically in the testis. Together, this study provides detailed phenotyping of the Srsf1 cKO, which convincingly supports the Sertoli Cell Only phenotype, establishes the timing of the first appearance of the spermatogonial defect, and provides new insight into the role of splicing factors and SRSF1 specifically in spermatogenesis. The experiments are well-designed and conducted, the overall methods and results are robust and convincing.

Weaknesses:<br /> This study does not provide a full mechanistic explanation connecting altered splicing with defects in SSC precursors. The claim that altered splicing of the Tial1 transcript mediates the effect of SRSF1 loss is not convincingly supported. In addition, some regions of the text suggest that misregulated splicing of Tial1 disrupts spermatogonial survival; while Tial1 is required for primordial germ cell survival in embryonic gonads (E11.5-13.5; Beck et al 1998), it is unclear if Tial1 is required for germline development beyond this embryonic stage.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This is large-scale genomics and transcriptomics study of the epidemic community-acquired methicillin-resistant S. aureus clone USA300, designed to identify core genome mutations that drove the emergence of the clone. It used publicly available datasets and a combination of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and independent principal-component analysis (ICA) of RNA-seq profiles to compare USA300 versus non-USA300 within clonal complex 8. By overlapping the analyses the authors identified a 38bp deletion upstream of the iron-scavenging surface-protein gene isdH that was both significantly associated with the USA300 lineage and with a decreased transcription of the gene.

Strengths:<br /> Several genomic studies have investigated genomic factors driving the emergence of successful S. aureus clones, in particular USA300. These studies have often focussed on acquisition of key accessory genes or have focussed on a small number of strains. This study makes a smart use of publicly available repositories to leverage the sample size of the analysis and identify new genomics markers of USA300 success.<br /> The approach of combining large-scale genomics and transcriptomics analysis is powerful, as it allows to make some inferences on the impact of the mutations. This is particularly important for mutations in intergenic regions, whose functional impact is often uncertain.<br /> The statistical genomics approaches are elegant and state-of-the-art and can be easily applied to other contexts or pathogens.

Weaknesses:<br /> The main weakness of this work is that these data don't allow a casual inference on the role of isdH in driving the emergence of USA300. It is of course impossible to prove which mutation or gene drove the success of the clone, however, experimental data would have strengthened the conclusions of the authors in my opinion.<br /> Another limitation of this approach is that the approach taken here doesn't allow to make any conclusions on the adaptive role of the isdH mutation. In other words, it is still possible that the mutation is just a marker of USA300 success, due to other factors such as PVL, ACMI or the SCCmecIVa. This is because by its nature this analysis is heavily influenced by population structure. Usually, GWAS is applied to find genetic loci that are associated with a phenotype and are independent of the underlying population structure. Here, authors are using GWAS to find loci that are associated with a lineage. In other words, they are simply running a univariate analysis (likely a logistic regression) between genetic loci and the lineage without any correction for population structure, since population structure is the outcome. Therefore, this approach can't be applied to most phenotype-genotype studies where correction for population structure is critical.<br /> Finally, the approach used is complex and not easily reproduced in another dataset. Although I like DBGWAS and find the network analysis elegant, I would be interested in seeing how a simpler GWAS tool like Pyseer would perform.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

The work of Poudel et al. identified potential causal mutations related to the successful emergence of the virulent USA300 community-associated MRSA clone within clonal complex 8. To achieve this, the authors employed a methodology that combines the genome-wide association studies (GWAS) with the inference of a transcriptional regulatory network (TRN) through the independent component analysis (ICA) method from publicly available transcriptomic data. Thus, they identified genes with altered expression in the iModulons calculated by ICA and enriched mutations obtained from the De Bruijn graph genome-wide association study (DBGWAS) in the USA300 strains versus non-USA300 strains. The results revealed a deletion of 38 base pairs, containing a binding site for the Fur repressor, and an A→T mutation, both occurring in the upstream region of the isdH gene, whose expression level in USA300 strains exhibited a general increase compared to the other group. IsdH encodes the iron-regulated surface determinant protein H, which plays a crucial role in iron acquisition from heme and immune system evasion - two essential processes for the pathogenicity of S. aureus.

Strengths:

The clonal complex 8 (CC8), one of the most prevalent among S. aureus, encompasses strains responsible for both community-associated MRSA infections (CA-MRSA) and healthcare-associated (HA) infections (HA-MRSA and HA-MSSA). Within the CC8, one of the most prominent lineages is USA300, which emerged in the early 2000s and has since become a leading cause of CA-MRSA infections in the United States. The key genetic traits that characterize USA300 strains include the presence of the Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) encoded by the genes lukF-PV and lukS-PV, the staphylococcal chromosomal cassette mec IVa (SCCmecIVa), and the arginine catabolic mobile element (ACME). Investigating the phenotypic impact of individual mutations on the success of epidemic strains through GWAS poses a challenge due to two main confounding factors: genome-wide linkage disequilibrium (LD) and population structure. The genome-wide LD is associated with false positives, where linked non-causal mutations are mistakenly identified as causal due to the same genomic backgrounds. Therefore, the strength of this work lies in the use of publicly available transcriptomic data to construct a TRN based on ICA. This approach validates the mutations enriched by GWAS and reduces the occurrence of false positives attributed to high genome-wide LD. By integrating various 'omics' data sources, this method enhances the reliability of the results and has successfully identified new potential genetic markers specific to USA300 strains. Furthermore, it revealed mutations within core genes and intergenic regulatory regions, findings that can be validated through experimental data.

Weaknesses:

GWAS aims to identify statistically significant associations that suggest a causal link between genotype and the specific phenotype of interest while simultaneously filtering out spurious associations caused by confounding factors. While the method described in this study minimizes the impact of genome-wide linkage disequilibrium (LD), it does not extend to addressing population structure. This is because the objective was precisely to identify mutations associated with the emergence of the USA300 clone. In this context, the confounding element arising from shared ancestry becomes the subject of analysis rather than an issue to be corrected. Therefore, it is essential to highlight that the method proposed in this work can not be applied to genome-wide association studies, where correction for population structure is critical for distinguishing genuine causal associations from spurious ones. This correction is crucial and necessary to most of the studied phenotypes of interest.

Another limitation is that, although the authors emphasize the mutation in the isdH gene, the analyses conducted in this study do not provide insight into any potential adaptive function associated with it. Similarly, like the other genes exhibiting distinct expression patterns associated with enriched mutations from DBGWAS in USA300 strains, isdH is among the potential markers related to the success of the clone. This group includes well-established markers, such as ACME, which carries relevant genes like the arc operon and the speG gene that contribute to virulence and survival at infection sites.

Finally, despite the availability of the codes on GitHub, the analysis itself is not easily reproducible or adaptable to other datasets.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The paper by Kim et al. investigates the potential of stimulating the dopaminergic A13 region to promote locomotor restoration in a Parkinson's mouse model. Using wild-type mice, 6-OHDA injection depletes dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta, without impairing those of the A13 region and the ventral tegmentum area, as previously reported in humans. Moreover, photostimulation of presumably excitatory (CAMKIIa) neurons in the vicinity of the A13 region improves bradykinesia and akinetic symptoms after 6-OHDA injection. Whole-brain imaging with retrograde and anterograde tracers reveals that the A13 region undergoes substantial changes in the distribution of its afferents and projections after 6-OHDA injection. The study suggests that if the remodeling of the A13 region connectome does not promote recovery following chronic dopaminergic depletion, photostimulation of the A13 region restores locomotor functions.

Strengths:<br /> Photostimulation of presumably excitatory (CAMKIIa) neurons in the vicinity of the A13 region promotes locomotion and locomotor recovery of wild-type mice 1 month after 6-OHDA injection in the medial forebrain bundle, thus identifying a new potential target for restoring motor functions in Parkinson's disease patients.

Weaknesses:<br /> Electrical stimulation of the medial Zona Incerta, in which the A13 region is located, has been previously reported to promote locomotion (Grossman et al., 1958). Recent mouse studies have shown that if optogenetic or chemogenetic stimulation of GABAergic neurons of the Zona Incerta promotes and restores locomotor functions after 6-OHDA injection (Chen et al., 2023), stimulation of glutamatergic ZI neurons worsens motor symptoms after 6-OHDA (Lie et al., 2022).

Although CAMKIIa is a marker of presumably excitatory neurons and can be used as an alternative marker of dopaminergic neurons, behavioral results of this study raise questions about the neuronal population targeted in the vicinity of the A13 region. Moreover, if YFP and CHR2-YFP neurons express dopamine (TH) within the A13 region (Fig. 2), there is also a large population of transduced neurons within and outside of the A13 region that do not, thus suggesting the recruitment of other neuronal cell types that could be GABAergic or glutamatergic.

Regarding the analysis of interregional connectivity of the A13 region, there is a lack of specificity (the viral approach did not specifically target the A13 region), the number of mice is low for such correlation analyses (2 sham and 3 6-OHDA mice), and there are no statistics comparing 6-OHDA versus sham (Fig. 4) or contra- versus ipsilesional sides (Fig. 5). Moreover, the data are too processed, and the color matrices (Fig. 4) are too packed in the current format to enable proper visualization of the data. The A13 afferents/efferents analysis is based on normalized relative values; absolute values should also be presented to support the claim about their upregulation or downregulation.

In the absence of changes in the number of dopaminergic A13 neurons after 6-OHDA injection, results from this correlation analysis are difficult to interpret as they might reflect changes from various impaired brain regions independently of the A13 region. There is no causal link between anatomical and behavioral data, which raises questions about the relevance of the anatomical data.

Overall, the study does not take advantage of genetic tools accessible in the mouse to address the direct or indirect behavioral and anatomical contributions of the A13 region to motor control and recovery after 6-OHDA injection.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This study aimed to investigate the effects of optically stimulating the A13 region in healthy mice and a unilateral 6-OHDA mouse model of Parkinson's disease (PD). The primary objectives were to assess changes in locomotion, motor behaviors, and the neural connectome. For this, the authors examined the dopaminergic loss induced by 6-OHDA lesioning. They found a significant loss of tyrosine hydroxylase (TH+) neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) while the dopaminergic cells in the A13 region were largely preserved. Then, they optically stimulated the A13 region using a viral vector to deliver the channelrhodopsine (CamKII promoter). In both sham and PD model mice, optogenetic stimulation of the A13 region induced pro-locomotor effects, including increased locomotion, more locomotion bouts, longer durations of locomotion, and higher movement speeds. Additionally, PD model mice exhibited increased ipsilesional turning during A13 region photoactivation. Lastly, the authors used whole-brain imaging to explore changes in the A13 region's connectome after 6-OHDA lesions. These alterations involved a complex rewiring of neural circuits, impacting both afferent and efferent projections. In summary, this study unveiled the pro-locomotor effects of A13 region photoactivation in both healthy and PD model mice. The study also indicates the preservation of A13 dopaminergic cells and the anatomical changes in neural circuitry following PD-like lesions that represent the anatomical substrate for a parallel motor pathway.

Strengths:<br /> These findings hold significant relevance for the field of motor control, providing valuable insights into the organization of the motor system in mammals. Additionally, they offer potential avenues for addressing motor deficits in Parkinson's disease (PD). The study fills a crucial knowledge gap, underscoring its importance, and the results bolster its clinical relevance and overall strength.

The authors adeptly set the stage for their research by framing the central questions in the introduction, and they provide thoughtful interpretations of the data in the discussion section. The results section, while straightforward, effectively supports the study's primary conclusion - the pro-locomotor effects of A13 region stimulation, both in normal motor control and in the 6-OHDA model of brain damage.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1) Anatomical investigation. I have a major concern regarding the anatomical investigation of plastic changes in the A13 connectome (Figures 4 and 5). While the methodology employed to assess the connectome is technically advanced and powerful, the results lack mechanistic insight at the cell or circuit level into the pro-locomotor effects of A13 region stimulation in both physiological and pathological conditions. This concern is exacerbated by a textual description of results that doesn't pinpoint precise brain areas or subareas but instead references large brain portions like the cortical plate, making it challenging to discern the implications for A13 stimulation. Lastly, the study is generally well-written with a smooth and straightforward style, but the connectome section presents challenges in readability and comprehension. The presentation of results, particularly the correlation matrices and correlation strength, doesn't facilitate biological understanding. It would be beneficial to explore specific pathways responsible for driving the locomotor effects of A13 stimulation, including examining the strength of connections to well-known locomotor-associated regions like the Pedunculopontine nucleus, Cuneiformis nucleus, LPGi, and others in the diencephalon, midbrain, pons, and medulla. Additionally, identifying the primary inputs to A13 associated with motor function would enhance the study's clarity and relevance.

The study raises intriguing questions about compensatory mechanisms in Parkinson's disease and a new perspective on the preservation of dopaminergic cells in A13, despite the SNc degeneration, and the plastic changes to input/output matrices. To gain inspiration for a more straightforward reanalysis and discussion of the results, I recommend the authors refer to the paper titled "Specific populations of basal ganglia output neurons target distinct brain stem areas while collateralizing throughout the diencephalon from the David Kleinfeld laboratory." This could guide the authors in investigating motor pathways across different brain regions.

2) Description of locomotor performance. Figure 3 provides valuable data on the locomotor effects of A13 region photoactivation in both control and 6-OHDA mice. However, a more detailed analysis of the changes in locomotion during stimulation would enhance our understanding of the pro-locomotor effects, especially in the context of 6-OHDA lesions. For example, it would be informative to explore whether the probability of locomotion changes during stimulation in the control and 6-OHDA groups. Investigating reaction time, speed, total distance, and even kinematic aspects during stimulation could reveal how A13 is influencing locomotion, particularly after 6-OHDA lesions. The laboratory of Whelan has a deep knowledge of locomotion and the neural circuits driving it so these features may be instructive to infer insights on the neural circuits driving movement. On the same line, examining features like the frequency or power of stimulation related to walking patterns may help elucidate whether A13 is engaging with the Mesencephalic Locomotor Region (MLR) to drive the pro-locomotor effects. These insights would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying A13-mediated locomotor changes in both healthy and pathological conditions.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Kim, Lognon et al. present an important finding on pro-locomotor effects of optogenetic activation of the A13 region, which they identify as a dopamine-containing area of the medial zona incerta that undergoes profound remodeling in terms of afferent and efferent connectivity after administration of 6-OHDA to the MFB. The authors claim to address a model of PD-related gait dysfunction, a contentious problem that can be difficult to treat with dopaminergic medication or DBS in conventional targets. They make use of an impressive array of technologies to gain insight into the role of A13 remodeling in the 6-OHDA model of PD. The evidence provided is solid and the paper is well written, but there are several general issues that reduce the value of the paper in its current form, and a number of specific, more minor ones. Also, some suggestions, that may improve the paper compared to its recent form, come to mind.

The most fundamental issue that needs to be addressed is the relation of the structural to the behavioral findings. It would be very interesting to see whether the structural heterogeneity in afferent/effects projections induced by 6-OHDA is related to the degree of symptom severity and motor improvement during A13 stimulation.

The authors provide extensive interrogation of large-scale changes in the organization of the A13 region afferent and efferent distributions. It remains unclear how many animals were included to produce Fig 4 and 5. Fig S5 suggests that only 3 animals were used, is that correct? Please provide details about the heterogeneity between animals. Please provide a table detailing how many animals were used for which experiment. Were the same animals used for several experiments?

While the authors provide evidence that photoactivation of the A13 is sufficient in driving locomotion in the OFT, this pro-locomotor effect seems to be independent of 6-OHDA-induced pathophysiology. Only in the pole test do they find that there seems to be a difference between Sham vs 6-OHDA concerning the effects of photoactivation of the A13. Because of these behavioral findings, optogenic activation of A13 may represent a gain of function rather than disease-specific rescue. This needs to be highlighted more explicitly in the title, abstract, and conclusion.

The authors claim that A13 may be a possible target for DBS to treat gait dysfunction. However, the experimental evidence provided (in particular the lack of disease-specific changes in the OFT) seems insufficient to draw such conclusions. It needs to be highlighted that optogenetic activation does not necessarily have the same effects as DBS (see the recent review from Neumann et al. in Brain: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37450573/). This is important because ZI-DBS so far had very mixed clinical effects. The authors should provide plausible reasons for these discrepancies. Is cell-specificity, which only optogenetic interventions can achieve, necessary? Can new forms of cyclic burst DBS achieve similar specificity (Spix et al, Science 2021)? Please comment.

In a recent study, Jeon et al (Topographic connectivity and cellular profiling reveal detailed input pathways and functionally distinct cell types in the subthalamic nucleus, 2022, Cell Reports) provided evidence on the topographically graded organization of STN afferents and McElvain et al. (Specific populations of basal ganglia output neurons target distinct brain stem areas while collateralizing throughout the diencephalon, 2021, Neuron) have shown similar topographical resolution for SNr efferents. Can a similar topographical organization of efferents and afferents be derived for the A13/ ZI in total?

In conclusion, this is an interesting study that can be improved by taking into consideration the points mentioned above.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors identify a mechanical model of activation of Abelson kinase involving the modification of stability of an alpha helix by mutations and different classes of inhibitors. They use NMR chemical shifts of mutant sequences of the alpha helix in a model of Abelson kinase including the regulatory and kinase domains.

Strengths:<br /> The mechanism of inhibition of this important drug target is highly complex involving multiple domains' interactions, While crystal structures can establish end states well, the details of more dynamic interactions among the components can be assessed by NMR studies, The authors previously established {Sonti, 2018, PMID29319304} that different inhibitors and assembled states result from changes of stabilisation of the assembly involving the kinase and the SH3 domain. This is extended here to<br /> illuminate the role of the kinase C terminal alpha helic I' to the domains' interface, expanding the previous identification of this area of the protein as key to agonist/antagonist action at the allosteric myristlylation binding site.

Weaknesses:<br /> The conclusions are based on the relationship with prior observations of classes of chemical shift perturbation, with a set of deletion mutants limited by expression issues. The origin of the force involving the straight or bent helix is not readily apparent. The deletion mutants are treated as solely limiting the helix length irrespective of residue type, and their interactions may be more subtle, beyond the helix stabilization, in other interactions, and in the indirect nature of NMR chemical shift perturbations.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this paper, Paladini and colleagues investigate the concerted motions within the Abl kinase that control its conformational transition between the active (disassembled) and inactive (assembled state). This work follows their previously published findings that binding of the type II inhibitor, imatinib to the active site of Abl, leads to kinase core disassembly via the force imposed by the P-loop and other regions of the N-lobe on the SH3 domain. Interestingly, imatinib-induced disassembly is prevented when an allosteric inhibitor, asciminib, binds to the myristate-binding pocket. Key to asciminib and myristate binding are motions of helix I, located in the C-lobe, and thus, helix I is hypothesized to be the sensor of the imatinib-induced changes. Specifically, bending of helix I upon engagement of myristate or asciminib was postulated to be important for re-assembly of the autoinhibited Abl core, and thus, reducing the "force" with which kinase N-lobe pushes against the SH2 domain upon binding imatinib.

The authors use NMR to measure conformational transitions in the several 15N-labeled Abl kinase constructs that display different degrees of helix I truncations. This analysis is slightly limited by the instability of the constructs that carry truncations beyond the helix I "bend". Nevertheless, it is sufficient to establish that truncation of helix I that removes its fragment, which is in contact with myristate or asciminib ligands, results in loss of the ability of helix I to impose "force" on the SH2 domain that results in kinase core disassembly, even in the presence of imatinib binding. In the absence of this force, the allosteric coupling between the helix I/SH2 and KD/SH3 interfaces is compromised. Principle component analysis is used to analyze the NMR data, and it is very clear and convincing.

A compelling evidence in support of the proposed allosteric mechanism comes from the analysis of the E528K disease mutation, identified in the Abl1 malformation syndrome. The authors show that this mutant, poised to break a salt bridge formed between E528 in the C-terminal portion of helix I and R479 on the kinase domain, increases helix I outward motions resulting in core disassembly and higher Abl kinase activity. Together, these results reinforce that helix I motions are central to the mechanism of kinase activation via core disassembly. I find that all authors' claims are supported by the experimental data. A couple of suggestions on how to expand and improve the discussion of the data are listed in specific feedback to the authors.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The study provides a complete comparative interactome analysis of α-arrestin in both humans and drosophila. The authors have presented interactomes of six humans and twelve Drosophila α-arrestins using affinity purification/mass spectrometry (AP/MS). The constructed interactomes helped to find α-arrestins binding partners through common protein motifs. The authors have used bioinformatic tools and experimental data in human cells to identify the roles of TXNIP and ARRDC5: TXNIP-HADC2 interaction and ARRDC5-V-type ATPase interaction. The study reveals the PPI network for α-arrestins and examines the functions of α-arrestins in both humans and Drosophila. The authors have carried out the necessary changes that were suggested, and the manuscript can now be accepted.

Comments: I would like to congratulate the authors and the corresponding authors of this manuscript for bringing together such an elaborate study on α-arrestin and conducting a comparative study in drosophila and humans.

Introduction: The introduction provides a rationale behind why the comparison between humans and Drosophila is performed.

Results: The results cover all the necessary points concluded from the experiments and computational analysis. The images are elaborate and well-made. The authors have a rigorous amount of work added together for the success of this manuscript. The authors have provided a database of network of α-arrestins in both humans and Drosophila which can be used by other researchers working in the same subject to study the interacting genes.

Discussion: the authors have utilized and discussed the conclusion they draw from their study. But could highlight more on ARRDCs and why it was selected out of the other arrestins.

References: the authors have considered the suggestion and added the necessary references.

The authors have provided future work directions associated with their work.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In this manuscript, the authors present a novel interactome focused on human and fly alpha-arrestin family proteins and demonstrate its application in understanding the functions of these proteins. Initially, the authors employed AP/MS analysis, a popular method for mapping protein-protein interactions (PPIs) by isolating protein complexes. Through rigorous statistical and manual quality control procedures, they established two robust interactomes, consisting of 6 baits and 307 prey proteins for humans, and 12 baits and 467 prey proteins for flies. To gain insights into the gene function, the authors investigated the interactors of alpha-arrestin proteins through various functional analyses, such as gene set enrichment. Furthermore, by comparing the interactors between humans and flies, the authors described both conserved and species-specific functions of the alpha-arrestin proteins. To validate their findings, the authors performed several experimental validations for TXNIP and ARRDC5 using ATAC-seq, siRNA knockdown, and tissue staining assays. The experimental results strongly support the predicted functions of the alpha-arrestin proteins and underscore their importance.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Lee, Kyungtae and colleagues have discovered and mapped out alpha-arrestin interactomes in both human and Drosophila through the affinity purification/mass spectrometry and the SAINTexpress method. Their work revealed highly confident interactomes, consisting of 390 protein-protein interactions (PPIs) between six human alpha-arrestins and 307 preproteins, as well as 740 PPIs between twelve Drosophila alpha-arrestins and 467 prey proteins.

To define and characterize these identified alpha-arrestin interactomes, the team employed a variety of widely recognized bioinformatics tools. These analyses included protein domain enrichment analysis, PANTHER for protein class enrichment, DAVID for subcellular localization analysis, COMPLEAT for the identification of functional complexes, and DIOPT to identify evolutionary conserved interactomes. Through these assessments, they not only confirmed the roles and associated functions of known alpha-arrestin interactors, such as ubiquitin ligase and protease, but also unearthed unexpected biological functions in the newly discovered interactomes. These included involvement in RNA splicing and helicase, GTPase-activating proteins, and ATP synthase.

The authors carried out further study into the role of human TXNIP in transcription and epigenetic regulation, as well as the role of ARRDC5 in osteoclast differentiation. It is particularly commendable that the authors conducted comprehensive testing of TXNIP's role in HDAC2 in gene expression and provided a compelling model while revised the manuscript. Additionally, the quantification of the immunocytochemistry data presented in Figure 6 convincingly supports the authors' hypothesis.

Overall, this study holds important value, as the newly identified alpha-arrestin interactomes are likely aiding functional studies of this protein group and advance alpha-arrestin research.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This study investigates how the neural representation of a stimulus transitions from that evoked by the presence of the stimulus (sensory) to one that exists only as a memory trace once the stimulus disappears (mnemonic). In simple terms, it explores the transition from so-called "iconic memory" (akin to residual sensory-driven neural activity) to working memory proper (self-sustained activity). The authors build a computational model for this transition and test it against data from two new psychophysical experiments plus two datasets from prior experiments.

Strengths and weaknesses:<br /> I really liked this work. It considers a fairly complex process but builds a mechanistically comprehensive scheme that is intuitive and testable. This is a hefty paper; the full model built by the authors has a lot of moving parts. But these are all carefully justified, and in fact, many of them are specifically tested by fitting customized variants of the model to the experimental data (which are rich enough to distinguish all of these variants, not only quantitatively but also qualitatively). Said differently, both the assumptions used to build the model and the conclusions drawn after comparison with the experimental data are well justified. In the end, although it takes some effort to put the whole scheme together, I think the reader learns a lot about memory mechanisms. The Discussion is rich, as beyond working memory per se, the work relates to numerous issues (e.g., perception, attention, neural dynamics, population coding). Importantly, although part of the value of the study lies in the way it integrates many prior results into a cohesive framework, it also makes an important novel point: that iconic and working memory are not qualitatively different things, but rather just different extreme manifestations of the one, continuous process whereby perceptual information is stored (as a pattern of neural activation) and made accessible to other cognitive functions. In this conceptualization, working memory corresponds to a readout of activity a significant time (typically > 1 s) after stimulus offset, whereas iconic memory is consistent with a readout from the same neural population but immediately or very shortly after stimulus offset. This account not only is parsimonious but also provides a specific hypothesis (or a set of hypotheses) that can be tested further.

I did not find any major weaknesses. The paper does require some time and effort in order to appreciate all that it contains, but this is inevitable, as it aims to (1) build a compact but mechanistically detailed account of a process that is somewhat complex, and (2) test key predictions through psychophysical experiments that must be sufficiently rich. In the end, I found the effort quite rewarding.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Previous work has shown subjects can use a form of short-term sensory memory, known as 'iconic memory', to accurately remember stimuli over short periods of time (several hundred milliseconds). Working memory maintains representations for longer periods of time but is strictly limited in its capacity. While it has long been assumed that sensory information acts as the input to working memory, a process model of this transfer has been missing. To address this, Tomic and Bays present the Dynamic Neural Resource (DyNR) model. The DyNR model captures the dynamics of processing sensory stimuli, transferring that representation into working memory, the diffusion of representations within working memory, and the selection of memory for report.

The DyNR model captures many of the effects observed in behavior. Most importantly, psychophysical experiments found the greater the delay between stimulus presentation and the selection of an item from working memory, the greater the error. This effect also depended on working memory load. In the model, these effects are captured by the exponential decay of sensory representations (i.e., iconic memory) following the offset of the stimulus. Once the selection cue is presented, residual information in iconic memory can be integrated into working memory, improving the strength of the representation and reducing error. This selection process takes time, and is slower for larger memory loads, explaining the observation that memory seems to decay instantly. The authors compare the DyNR model to several variants, demonstrating the importance of the persistence of sensory information in iconic memory, normalization of representations with increasing memory load, and diffusion of memories over time.

Strengths:<br /> The manuscript provides a convincing argument for the interaction of iconic memory and working memory, as captured by the DyNR model. The analyses are cutting-edge and the results are well captured by the DyNR model. In particular, a strength of the manuscript is the comparison of the DyNR model to several alternative variants.

The results provide a process model for interactions between iconic memory and working memory. This will be of interest to neuroscientists and psychologists studying working memory. I see this work as providing a foundation for understanding behavior in continuous working memory tasks, from either a mechanistic, neuroscience, perspective or as a high-water mark for comparison to other psychological process models.

Finally, the manuscript is well written. The DyNR model is nicely described and an intuition for the dynamics of the model is clearly shown in Figures 2 and 4.

Weaknesses:<br /> Despite its strengths, the paper does have some (relatively minor) weaknesses. In particular, the authors could consider the role of sensory processing, and its limitations, and variability in selecting an item from working memory as other factors affecting memory accuracy.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors set out to formally contrast several theoretical models of working memory, being particularly interested in comparing the models regarding their ability to explain cueing effects at short cue durations. These benefits are traditionally attributed to the existence of a high capacity, rapidly decaying sensory storage which can be directly read out following short latency retro-cues. Based on the model fits, the authors alternatively suggest that cue-benefits arise from a freeing of working memory resources, which at short cue latencies can be utilized to encode additional sensory information into VWM.

A dynamic neural population model consisting of separate sensory and VWM populations was used to explain temporal VWM fidelity of human behavioral data collected during several working memory tasks. VWM fidelity was probed at several timepoints during encoding, while sensory information was available, and maintenance when sensory information was no longer available. Furthermore, set size and exposure durations were manipulated to disentangle contributions of sensory and visual working memory.

Overall, the model explained human memory fidelity well, accounting for set size, exposure time, retention time, error distributions, and swap errors. Crucially the model suggests that recall at short delays is due to post-cue integration of sensory information into VWM as opposed to direct readout from sensory memory. The authors formally address several alternative theories, demonstrating that models with reduced sensory persistence, direct readout from sensory memory, no set-size dependent delays in cue processing, and constant accumulation rate provide significantly worse fits to the data.

I congratulate the authors for this rigorous scientific work. I have only very few remarks that I hope the authors can clarify.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The contribution of glial cells to the pathogenesis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is of substantial interest and the investigators have contributed significantly to this emerging field via prior publications. In the present study, authors use a SOD1G93A mouse model to elucidate the role of astrocyte ephrinB2 signaling in ALS disease progression. Erythropoietin-producing human hepatocellular receptors (Ephs) and the Eph receptor-interacting proteins (ephrins) signaling is an important mediators of signaling between neurons and non-neuronal cells in the nervous system. Recent evidence suggests that dysregulated Eph-ephrin signaling in the mature CNS is a feature of neurodegenerative diseases. In the ALS model, upregulated Eph4A expression in motor neurons has been linked to disease pathogenesis. In the present study, authors extend previous findings to a new class of ephrinB2 ligands. Urban et al. hypothesize that upregulated ephrinB2 signaling contributes to disease pathogenesis in ALS mice. The authors successfully test this hypothesis and their results generally support their conclusion.

Major strengths of this work include a robust study design, a well-defined translational model, and complementary biochemical and experimental methods such that correlated findings are followed up by interventional studies. Authors show that ephrinB2 ligand expression is progressively upregulated in the ventral horn of the cervical and lumbar spinal cord through pre-symptomatic to end stages of the disease. This novel association was also observed in lumbar spinal cord samples from post-mortem samples of human ALS donors with a SOD1 mutation. Further, they use a lentiviral approach to drive knock-down of ephrinB2 in the central cervical region of SOD1G93A mice at the pre-symptomatic stage. Interestingly, in spite of using a non-specific promoter, authors note that the lentiviral expression was preferentially driven in astrocytes.

Since respiratory compromise is a leading cause of morbidity in the ALS population, the authors proceed to characterize the impact of ephrinB2 knockdown on diaphragm muscle output. In mice approaching the end stage of the disease, electrophysiological recordings from the diaphragm muscle show that animals in the knock-down group exhibited a ~60% larger amplitude. This functional preservation of diaphragm function was also accompanied with the preservation of diaphragm neuromuscular innervation. However, it must be noted that this cervical ephrinB2 knockdown approach had no impact on disease onset, disease duration, or animal survival. Furthermore, there was no impact of ephrinB2 knockdown on forelimb or hindlimb function. This is an expected result, given the fairly focal approach of ephrinB2 knockdown in C3-C5 spinal segments.

The major limitation of the study is the conclusion that the preservation of diaphragm output following ephrinB2 knockdown in SOD1 mice is mediated primarily (if not entirely) by astrocytes. The authors present convincing evidence that a reduction in ephrinB2 is observed in local astrocytes (~56% transduction) following the intraspinal injection of the lentivirus. However, the proportion of cell types assessed for transduction with the lentivirus in the spinal cord was limited to neurons, astrocytes, and oligodendrocyte lineage cells. Microglia comprise a large proportion of the glial population in the spinal grey matter and have been shown to associate closely with respiratory motor pools. This cell type, amongst the many other that comprise the ventral gray matter, have not been investigated in this study. Nonetheless, there is convincing evidence to suggest astrocytes play a significant role, as compared to oligodendrocytes in promoting ALS pathogenesis.

In summary, this study by Urban et al. provides a valuable framework for Eph-Ephrin signaling mechanisms imposing pathological changes in an ALS mouse model. The role of glial cells in ALS pathology is a very exciting and upcoming field of investigation. The current study proposes a novel astrocyte-mediated mechanism for the propagation of disease that may eventually help to identify potential therapeutic targets.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In the manuscript by Urban et al., the authors attempt to further delineate the role with which non-neuronal CNS cells play in the development of ALS. Towards this goal, the transmembrane signaling molecule ephrinB2 was studied. It was found that there is an increased expression of ephrinB2 in astrocytes within the cervical ventral horn of the spinal cord in a rodent model of ALS. Moreover, reduction of ephrinB2 reduced motoneuron loss and prevented respiratory dysfunction at the NMJ. Further driving the importance of ephrinB2 is an increased expression in the spinal cords of human ALS individuals. Collectively, these findings present compelling evidence implicating ephrinB2 as a contributing factor towards the development of ALS.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

Using in vitro and in vivo approaches, the authors first demonstrate that BEST4 inhibits intestinal tumor cell growth and reduces their metastatic potential, possibly via downstream regulation of TWIST1.

They further show that HES4 positively upregulates BEST4 expression, with direct interaction with BEST4 promoter region and protein. The authors further expand on this with results showing that negative regulation of TWIST1 by HES4 requires BEST4 protein, with BEST4 required for TWIST1 association with HES4. Reduction of BEST1 expression was shown in CRC tumor samples, with correlation of BEST4 mRNA levels with different clinicopathological factors such as sex, tumor stage, and lymph node metastasis, suggesting a tumor-suppressive role of BEST4 for intestinal cancer.

Strengths:

• Good quality western blot data.<br /> • Multiple approaches were used to validate the findings.<br /> • Logical experimental progression for readability.<br /> • Human patient data / In vivo murine model / Multiple cell lines were used, which supports translatability / reproducibility of findings.

Weaknesses:

• Interpretation of figures and data (unsubstantiated conclusions).<br /> • Figure quality.<br /> • Figure legends lack information.<br /> • Lacking/shallow discussion.<br /> • Requires more information for reproducibility regarding materials and methods.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this study, the authors describe the participation of the Hes4-BEST4-Twist axis in controlling the process of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and the advancement of colorectal cancers (CRC). They assert that this axis diminishes the EMT capabilities of CRC cells through a variety of molecular mechanisms. Additionally, they propose that reduced BEST4 expression within tumor cells might serve as an indicator of an adverse prognosis for individuals with CRC.

Strengths:

• Exploring the correlation between the Hes4-BEST4-Twist axis, EMT, and the advancement of CRC is a novel perspective and gives readers a fresh standpoint.<br /> • The whole transcriptome sequence analysis (Figure 5) showing low expression of BEST4 in CRC samples will be of broad interest to cancer specialists as well as cell biologists although further corroborative data is essential to strengthen these findings (See Weaknesses).

Weaknesses:

• The authors employed three kinds of CRC cell lines, but not untransformed cells such as intestinal epithelial organoids which are commonly used in recent research.<br /> • The authors use three different human CRC cell lines with a lack of consistency in the selection of them. Please clarify 1) how these lines are different from each other, 2) why they pick up one or two of them for each experiment. To be more convincing, at least two lines should be employed for each in vitro experiment.<br /> • The authors demonstrated associations between BEST4 and cell proliferation/viability as well as migration/invasion, utilizing CRC cell lines, but it should be noted that these findings do not indicate a tumor-suppressive role of BEST4 as mentioned in line 120. Furthermore, while the authors propose that "BEST4 functions as a tumor suppressor in CRC" in line 50, there seems no supporting data to suggest BEST4 as a tumor suppressor gene.<br /> • The HES4-BEST4-Twist1 axis likely plays a significant role in CRC progression via EMT but not CRC initiation. Some sentences could lead to a misunderstanding that the axis is important for CRC initiation.<br /> • The authors mostly focus on the relationship of the HES4-BEST4-Twist1 axis with EMT, but their claims sometimes appear to deviate from this focus.<br /> • Some experiments do not appear to have a direct relevance to their claims. For example, the analysis using the xenograft model in Figure 2E-J is not optimal for analyzing EMT. The authors should analyze metastatic or invasive properties of the transplanted tumors if they intend to provide some supporting evidence for their claims.<br /> • In Figure 4H, ZO-1 and E-cad expression looks unchanged in the BEST4 KD.<br /> • The in vivo and in vitro data supporting the whole transcriptome sequence analysis (Figure 5) is mostly insufficient. Including the following experiments will substantiate their claims: 1) BEST4 and HES4 immunostaining of human surgical tissue samples, 2) qPCR data of HES4, Twist1, Vimentin, etc. as shown in Figure 5C, 5D.<br /> • Some statements are inconsistent probably due to grammatical errors. (For example, some High/low may be reversed in lines 234-244.)

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, the role of orexin receptors in dopamine neurons is studied. Considering the importance of both orexin and dopamine signalling in the brain, with critical roles in arousal and drug seeking, this study is important to understand the anatomical and functional interaction between these two neuromodulators. This work suggests that such interaction is direct and occurs at the level of SN and VTA, via the expression of OX1R-type orexin receptors by dopaminergic neurons.

Strengths:<br /> The use of a transgenic line that lacks OX1R in dopamine-transporter-expressing neurons is a strong approach to dissecting the direct role of orexin in modulating dopamine signalling in the brain. The battery of behavioural assays to study this line provides a valuable source of information for researchers interested in the role of orexin-A in animal physiology.

Weaknesses:<br /> The choice of methods to demonstrate the role of orexin in the activation of dopamine neurons is not justified and the quantification methods are not described with enough detail. The representation of results can be dramatically improved and the data can be statistically analysed with more appropriate methods.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This manuscript examines the expression of orexin receptors in the midbrain - with a focus on dopamine neurons - and uses several fairly sophisticated manipulation techniques to explore the role of this peptide neurotransmitter in reward-related behaviors. Specifically, in situ hybridization is used to show that dopamine neurons predominantly express the orexin receptor 1 subtype and then go on to delete this receptor in dopamine neurons using a transgenic strategy. Ex vivo calcium imaging of midbrain neurons is used to show that in the absence of this receptor orexin is no longer able to excite dopamine neurons of the substantia nigra.

The authors proceed to use this same model to study the effect of orexin receptor 1 deletion on a series of behavioral tests, namely, novelty-induced locomotion and exploration, anxiety-related behavior, preference for sweet solutions, cocaine-induced conditioned place preference, and energy metabolism. Of these, the most consistent effects are seen in the tests of novelty-induced locomotion and exploration in which the mice with orexin 1 receptor deletion are observed to show greater levels of exploration, relative to wild-type, when placed in a novel environment, an effect that is augmented after icv administration of orexin.

In the final part of the paper, the authors use PET imaging to compare brain-wide activity patterns in the mutant mice compared to wildtype. They find differences in several areas both under control conditions (i.e., after injection of saline) as well as after injection of orexin. They focus on changes in the dorsal bed nucleus of stria terminalis (dBNST) and the lateral paragigantocellular nucleus (LPGi) and perform analysis of the dopaminergic projections to these areas. They provide anatomical evidence that these regions are innervated by dopamine fibers from the midbrain, are activated by orexin in control, but not mutant mice, and that dopamine receptors are present. Thus, they argue these anatomical data support the hypothesis that behavioral effects of orexin receptor 1 deletion in dopamine neurons are due to changes in dopamine signaling in these areas.

Strengths:<br /> Understanding how orexin interacts with the dopamine system is an important question and this paper contains several novel findings along these lines. Specifically:<br /> (1) The distribution of orexin receptor subtypes in VTA and SN is explored thoroughly.<br /> (2) Use of the genetic model that knocks out a specific orexin receptor subtype from only dopamine neurons is a useful model and helps to narrow down the behavioral significance of this interaction.<br /> (3) PET studies showing how central administration of orexin evokes dopamine release across the brain is intriguing, especially since two key areas are pursued - BNST and LPGi - where the dopamine projection is not as well described/understood.

Weaknesses:<br /> The role of the orexin-dopamine interaction is not explored in enough detail. The manuscript presents several related findings, but the combination of anatomy and manipulation studies does not quite tell a cogent story. Ideally, one would like to see the authors focus on a specific behavioral parameter and show that one of their final target areas (dBNST or LPGi) was responsible or at least correlated with this behavioral readout. In addition, some more discussion on what the results tell us about orexin signaling to dopamine neurons under normal physiological conditions would be very useful. For example, what is the relevance of the orexin-dopamine interaction blunting novelty-induced locomotion under wildtype conditions?

In some places in the Results, insufficient explanation and reporting is provided. For example, when reporting the behavioral effects of the Ox1 deletion in two bottle preference, it is stated that "[mutant] mice showed significant changes..." without stating the direction in which preference was affected.

The cocaine CPP results are difficult to interpret because it is unclear whether any of the control mice developed a CPP preference. Therefore, it is difficult to conclude that the knockout animals were unaffected by drug reward learning. Similarly, the sucrose/sucralose preference scores are also difficult to interpret because no test of preference vs. water is performed (although the data appear to show that there is a preference at least at higher concentrations, it has not been tested).

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This manuscript represents an elegant bioinformatics approach to addressing causal pathways in vascular and liver tissue related to atherosclerosis/coronary artery disease, including those shared by humans and mice and those that are specific to only one of these species. The authors constructed co-expression networks using bulk transcriptome data from human (aorta, coronary) and mouse (aorta) vascular and liver tissue. They mapped human CAD GWAS data onto these modules, mapped GWAS SNPs to putatively causal genes, identified pathways and modules enriched in CAD GWAS hits, assessed those shared between vascular and liver tissues and between humans and mice, determined key driver genes in CAD-associated supersets, and used mouse single-cell transcriptome data to infer the roles of specific vascular and liver cell types. The overall approach used by the authors is rigorous and provides new insights into potentially causal pathways in vascular tissue and liver involved in atherosclerosis/CAD that are shared between humans and mice as well as those that are species-specific. This approach could be applied to a variety of other common complex conditions.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Mouse models are widely used to determine key molecular mechanisms of atherosclerosis, the underlying pathology that leads to coronary artery disease. The authors use various systems biology approaches, namely co-expression and Bayesian Network analysis, as well as key driver analysis, to identify co-regulated genes and pathways involved in human and mouse atherosclerosis in artery and liver tissues. They identify species-specific and tissue-specific pathways enriched for the genetic association signals obtained in genome-wide association studies of human and mouse cohorts.

Strengths:<br /> The manuscript is well executed with appropriate analysis methods. It also provides a compelling series of results regarding mouse and human atherosclerosis.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This study examines the context-dependent modulation of auditory cortical neurons in response to expected sensory input, either self-generated sounds or expected perturbations of self-generated sounds. Specifically, using songbirds, the authors ask whether social context (the presence of a female conspecific) affects 1) the response of auditory cortical neurons to the bird's own song when he is singing; and 2) the response of neurons to perturbations of auditory feedback that the bird has been trained to expect.

Strengths:<br /> First, the authors report that across the population, the responses of the neurons does not differ when a male bird sings alone or if he sings to a female. A fraction of auditory cortical neurons, however, do show significant differences in the firing rate, precision, and/or degree of burst firing when males sing alone vs. when they sing to females. This finding is broadly consistent with the literature showing that sensory neurons (visual, auditory, somatosensory, etc.) can be rapidly reconfigured into different "information processing modes" depending on behavioral state (e.g, quiescence vs vigilance).

For the perturbation experiments, the authors trained birds to expect distorted auditory feedback during a particular syllable. They found that some neurons showed greater responses during perturbation when a female was present (compared to when males were alone) while other neurons had smaller responses during perturbation when a female was present. In addition, the response of a small number of auditory cortical neurons were not affected by behavioral state. These results contrast with their prior report that the responses of midbrain dopaminergic neurons that project to the basal ganglia are "uniformly reduced" in the presence of a female, raising a question of how an evaluation signal is transformed in the circuit from the primary sensory region to the midbrain.

Weaknesses:<br /> While the experiments and analysis are solid, the finding that social context can alter responses of auditory cortical neurons in a multitude of ways (increase, decrease or no change) raises several questions that can be examined with additional analysis. For example, do context-dependent differences in auditory responses derive from context-dependent differences in the songs? Are context-dependent differences present in all classes of neurons and throughout the auditory system?

The observed heterogeneity in the firing properties of auditory cortical neurons, both in response to self-generated sounds and during perturbations of auditory feedback, raises the question of which neurons are sensitive to social context (which likely can be addressed by the authors in a revision). The authors should provide additional details about the recordings:

a) What are the locations of the recording sites?<br /> Prior work has shown that there is an organized map of spectrotemporal features of sounds in the auditory cortex of songbirds; spectral tuning widths change along the medial-lateral axis and temporal tuning widths differ between the input and output layers of Field L. Were the recordings primarily in Field L2 (thalamo-recipient region), L1 or L3? Were some recordings lateral to Field L in secondary auditory regions? Were the neurons that showed context-dependent changes in firing properties localized or distributed throughout Field L (i.e., were the context-dependent differences in neural responses truly brain-wide)? At a minimum, the authors should include a schematic showing the different regions of Field L and a summary of the location of the recording sites. Images of the processed tissue with electrolytic lesions would also be helpful.

b) Was the context-dependent modulation limited to a particular class of neurons (distinguished by spike waveform shape, spontaneous firing rate, or other feature)?

While the authors attribute differences in the responses of single auditory cortical neurons to the presence of a female, other potential explanations for the observed differences should be examined (and potentially ruled out):

a) Prior work has shown that songs of zebra finches differ slightly when males sing alone compared to when they sing to females: songs are faster; pitch is less variable; and the number of introductory elements is greater when males sing to females. Do some of the observed social context-dependent differences in the responses of auditory neurons reflect differences in the songs in the two conditions? This idea is supported in part by a prior study in juvenile zebra finches (Keller & Hahnloser, 2009) showing that ~20% of the neurons they recorded in Field L and a secondary auditory region (CLM) showed anticipatory activity even before the onset of a song bout, suggesting a source of premotor (or at least non-auditory drive) to neurons in the auditory cortex. Did the authors of this study also find premotor activity in Field L, and if so, did it differ between the two social contexts? Might differences in Field L responses reflect motor/song differences?

b) For the perturbation experiments, the authors report heterogeneous responses to playback, with some neurons firing more and other firing less when a female is present compared to when the male is alone. Keller and Hahnloser (2009) found that in juvenile birds, responses of Field L to perturbations of auditory feedback were sensitive to sound amplitude; perturbation responses increased with relative perturbation amplitude. This raises a question of whether perturbation amplitude is different when a male is alone and when a female is present (i.e., the male may move towards the female when she is present and if the speaker is close to the female, the perturbation may be louder than when the male is alone; alternatively, the male be more active when he is alone so the loudness of the perturbation may be more variable across song bouts). It would be useful to know if (and how much) perturbation amplitude varied depending on the location inside the cage as well as whether the sound pressure level of the underlying song was higher (e.g., Lombard effect). Addition of details of the experimental setup/procedure would help to allay concerns that the amplitude of the white noise varied significantly depending on behavioral context.

Finally, I am still trying to make sense of the differences in the context-dependent modulation of responses of auditory cortical neurons vs. midbrain dopaminergic neurons. Given the heterogeneity of responses in Field L, both to self-generated sounds and to expected perturbations during singing, how are the signals decoded downstream of Field L? At the population level, neither the mean firing rate nor the timing of firing of Field L neurons changed with courtship. Similarly, across the population, the responses to perturbations of auditory feedback were not affected by courtship state (error signal attenuated in 11 neurons, increased in 22 neurons and not affected in 10 neurons). Yet, the courtship state "uniformly" reduces the response of midbrain dopaminergic neurons to auditory perturbation. It would be helpful if the authors could include a model and/or more discussion of how this change may arise.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

In the manuscript 'Auditory cortical error signals retune during songbird courtship', Jones and Goldberg study auditory cortex in male zebra finches. They explore song-related responses in two different contexts, when the male is either alone or in the presence of a female. Social-context related responses are hypothesized based on previous results on downstream VTA neurons where such modulation is found. They play jamming stimuli through a loudspeaker to probe sensitivity of song-related neural responses to these external stimuli. They find a heterogeneity of responses, in line with auditory cortical neurons computing the social modulation of responses found in VTA.

Strengths:

In general, the work is interesting and sheds light onto auditory processing and self-perception mechanisms in songbirds.

Weaknesses:

Stability of responses has not been studied: some neurons seem to have responses that slowly drift in time, which could lead to observed differences between alone and with-female conditions. Also, possible motor confounds and sound-of-audience confounds should be addressed. The language is often imprecise.

Stability and Reversal: It is a bit unfortunate that stability of effects seemingly has not been studied by reversing experimental conditions. The work would be much stronger if authors could show that audience-dependent tuning is robust in individual cells. Did they record from some neurons during reversal back to the alone condition? Ideally, the responses should be identical before and after recording with an audience. This would control for possible non-stationarities in their neuron recordings/spike-sorting/circadian trends. If authors do not have such data, it would be worth wile to even just try to divide the dataset for each neuron and condition (either the audience or isolate condition) into two parts to verify that the response is the same in either part (provided sufficient song renditions are recorded). See also my comment below about Fig. 2A.

Motor responses: Does DAF playback change song? If so, especially if it applies only in one of the two conditions (audience/no audience), then the observed response differences could be motor-related rather than auditory responses. Analyses of song spectrograms right after DAF would presumably provide the answer.

Similarly, motif-aligned spiking activity was time warped to the median duration of undirected or directed motifs. Could the shorter motifs during directed song (as has been reported in other studies) lead to alignment differences that would account for the different error responses in alone/wfemale conditions? In other words, could increased error responses be due to the fixed 100 ms analysis window of the audience condition that extends into a song region beyond the 100 ms region of the no-audience condition where there is increased firing? And vice versa for observed decreases in error responses, i.e. is there a firing pause just after the offset of the 100 ms window in the no-audience condition that causes audience dependence of responses? A simple compensation of song tempo differences by shortening/stretching the analysis window in one of the two conditions would allow to test for this.

Audience versus sound of audience: In the first sentence of the discussion authors write: we discovered that auditory representations of an animal's own vocalizations change with an audience. Is it truly the audience that causes the difference in error responses or is it the sounds the audience makes? To control for that would be to play back stimuli that simulate a non-silent audience through a loudspeaker to see whether error responses depend on the soundscape created by a typical audience (either present or absent). Authors probably do not have such data and to record it would go beyond the scope of this study, but it would be important to discuss this possibility or perform some analysis in that vein.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this study, Jones et al. examine how neural activity in a primary auditory area (field L) of singing male songbirds is modulated by the presence or absence of an audience (a female conspecific). Prior work has demonstrated that the presence of an audience attenuates the responses of dopaminergic neurons to distortions of auditory feedback (DAF). Here the authors report that even in a region that is primarily considered sensory, responses to DAF are also modulated by the audience, although in a heterogeneous manner that does not readily explain previously observed attenuation. These findings address an interesting question and will potentially be important in adding to an understanding of how non-sensory factors can alter response properties of neurons even in primary sensory regions in a context dependent fashion. However, to be fully persuasive, additional analyses will be required to address how much of the apparent modulation by audience may be explained by other factors such as changes in recorded neurons or their properties over time.

Full Public Review:

In this study, Jones et al. examine how neural activity in a primary auditory area (field L) of singing male songbirds is modulated by the presence or absence of an audience (a female conspecific). They test whether activity in Field L differs between conditions in which the male is singing to a female (directed song) or alone (undirected song) and whether response to distortions of auditory feedback (DAF) differ between these conditions. Previous work has shown that in other parts of the songbird brain, sensory-motor activity can differ between directed and undirected song, and that responses to DAF are attenuated when males sing directed song versus undirected song. These prior results raise the interesting question of the extent to which such modulations of activity by the presence of an audience are already present in primary sensory areas such as Field L. This possibility is also motivated by prior work that has shown that Field L activity is not exclusively explained by auditory input, but can also be modulated by the bird's state - whether it is singing or not.

Against this background, the questions asked here are of interest for two inter-related reasons:

1) the authors address whether the presence of an audience (a female conspecific) alters activity in a primary auditory area during singing. Primary auditory areas such as Field L, and analogous mammalian thalamo-recipient cortical regions such as A1, are often thought of as responding very specifically to the features of sensory stimuli, but are also understood to be modulated by a variety of factors including the attentional and behavioral state of the animal. For audition, such modulation includes whether or not animals are vocalizing and listening to themselves or listening to playback of their own vocalizations. Cited works from Keller (2009) as well as Eliades and Wang (2008) have indicated that the act of vocalizing can modulate auditory responses to self-generated feedback in primary auditory areas relative to those arising from playback of the same sounds. Here, the question is whether responses to self-generated feedback differ between conditions of singing alone versus singing to a female audience. A demonstration that the presence of an audience matters to responses in Field L would add to a general understanding of how it is that non-auditory factors can modulate sensory responses.

2) the authors address the possible source of an audience-dependent modulation of responses to feedback perturbation in the VTA previously reported by Goldberg and colleagues (2023). In the VTA, responses to perturbations during singing are consistently attenuated when males are singing to females versus when they are singing alone, but the underlying mechanisms of this modulation are unknown. Here, the authors test the possibility that such modulation by an audience is already present at the level of Field L. The previously reported attenuation in VTA is quite striking and reflects a nice example of how neural processing can differ with varying behavioral priorities. Understanding whether this modulation of responses to DAF arises already in primary auditory areas would further a mechanistic understanding of an intriguing example of state-dependent modulation of sensory processing and behavior, and lend broad insight into related phenomena.

The authors report 1) that activity in Field L differs between directed and undirected singing at many individual recording sites, but that these changes are heterogeneous, with both increases and decreases in activity, so that there is no consistent change across the population and 2) that the responses to DAF differ between directed and undirected song, but that there is no consistent attenuation of response (as observed in the VTA) and instead heterogeneous increases and decreases in response to DAF so that there is no net change at the population level.

These findings, if firmly established, are important and of general interest. While they do not readily explain the source of the audience-dependent attenuation of auditory responses to DAF in the VTA, the demonstration of audience-dependent modulation of self-generated feedback and its disruption in a primary auditory area is an exciting result that would provide an opportunity for further investigation of how changes in social context influence brain and behavior. The manuscript is generally well written, although the presentation is terse. My main reservations about the current manuscript relate to aspects of experimental design and analysis that need to be clarified and addressed before these conclusions will be fully persuasive. There are also some places where further discussion of the findings and their relationship to prior studies would be helpful.

1. A central concern relates to whether the main reported effects associated with differences in singing directed versus undirected song reflect only those changes in conditions, versus contributions from changes in unit isolation or response properties over time. The authors record undirected song in a block in the morning and only after collecting at least 40 renditions do they later record responses during directed song over a series of repeated exposures to a female. Therefore, differences between data collected during undirected song and directed song also reflect differences between data collected initially during the morning versus later. It is unclear from methods whether any of these recordings during undirected and directed conditions are interleaved, but if this is not the case, then it is crucial to ask how stable were neural recordings with respect to unit isolation, and potential changes to response properties, over the duration of the experiments. This would be less of a concern if the results mirrored those observed in the VTA, where attenuation of responses was observed across the entire population during directed versus undirected conditions - it is hard to explain a phenomenon that is consistently observed across the population as arising from a change in which neurons and spikes are contributing to responses, or other forms of non-stationarity. However, because there are no significant differences reported at the population level in the current study, it is important to address the possibility that observed differences between conditions reflect some form of noise or drift in recorded units, rather than being entirely due to directed versus undirected singing. I have elaborated in more detail below on this concern, including places where the data seems to suggest some non-stationarity of responses, and have some suggestions for ways in which this concern might be addressed.

2. A second concern, related to this first one, has to do with the categorical definition of 'error neurons'. The authors note in their text that it could be problematic to apply categorical definitions to continuous distributions, and yet that seems to be what they then do. The authors have a metric of error sensitivity that they apply to each neuron's response to DAF in both undirected and directed conditions (the error score). They show that there is a continuous distribution of error scores (Figure 2 - figure supplement 1) across the population, with no bimodality that would be suggestive of distinct error sensitive and error-insensitive neurons. One nice feature of their analysis is that they also show the distribution of error scores computed in an analogous fashion for a period of neural activity in the song prior to DAF. This control data set makes it persuasive that there is a significant response to DAF, but also shows that there can be a broad range of error scores even when no DAF has been played, and that this range of 'noise' responses to DAF overlaps substantially with the actual responses to DAF. Despite the continuum of error scores, the authors define a subset of neurons as error responsive only if their responses to DAF exceed a specific threshold (2.5 standard deviations). One of the main conclusions of the paper is based on finding a subset of 22 neurons that exhibited error responses (by this definition) only during singing to a female and 11 neurons that exhibited error responses only when singing alone. These neurons are described as 'retuned' because they have error responses in only one condition.

The problem here is that for some, if not many, of the neurons that are categorically defined as being responsive to DAF in only one condition (directed versus undirected) there is almost certainly not a significant difference in the actual responses to DAF between conditions. This is apparent in the relevant data figure (figure 2 - figure supplement 1) and is a consequence of using a threshold to split a continuous distribution into groups defined as error responsive or not. For example, several neurons in this plot that have almost identical scores in the directed and undirected condition are counted as examples of retuning because the error scores are just a bit over 2.5 in the directed condition and just a bit under 2.5 in the undirected condition.

That this kind of categorical approach may be problematic is apparent in the control data in the plot. Despite the absence of any perturbation, there are error responsive neurons present in these data that are considered selective for directed versus undirected singing - this is an expected consequence of using a threshold on dispersed or noisy biological data. Shifting to a more stringent threshold of three standard deviations, as the authors do, does not help with this problem, as that still treats as categorically different responses that fall on either side of a line, even if only by a tiny amount. I suggest that the authors devise a measure for each neuron to test whether the responses to DAF are significantly different under the two conditions (directed versus undirected). As noted above, this measure should take into account some assessment of the stationarity of responses, as well as the distribution of responses (which, in some of the examples does not seem to be Gaussian around a mean response level, but rather highly variable across trials).

3. There are several places where further discussion of the previous literature and how the current results relate to that literature would be helpful. This includes:

3a. Some discussion of what is already known about the auditory tuning of field L, and the extent to which responses associated with distortion of feedback may reflect the frequency tuning of field L neurons versus something that might be construed as more specifically as detecting an error in perceived feedback. For example, Field L neurons have previously been characterized as having relatively simple spectro-temporal receptive fields, often with a single frequency band that is excitatory and nearby frequency bands that are inhibitory. It would be beyond the scope of this paper to directly assess the extent to which both song responses and responses to DAF are well predicted by simple STRFs that might be measured for the recorded neurons, or computed from activity during a range of vocalizations, but perhaps worth discussing whether a neuron with such frequency tuning would potentially exhibit 'error responses' of the sort described here, simply because the DAF stimulus happens to fall into the excitatory or inhibitory regions of the neuron's receptive field. While it is OK to use the term 'error responsive' in the current study, it would be good to make clear that changes in firing associated with playing DAF should be expected even for neurons that have simple auditory receptive fields (i.e. with center surround tuning to specific frequencies in a tonotopic map, as has been described for Field L) without necessarily indicating that these neurons are specifically registering any deviation or 'error' between expected feedback and experienced feedback. In this respect, there are multiple subdivisions of Field L with different tuning properties. Please specify further what criteria were used to determine recording locations and how these correspond with previously defined subdivisions.

3b. It would also be useful to discuss further previous work on differences in auditory tuning or responses between conditions when subjects are vocalizing, versus when vocalizations are played back (as in Keller, Eliades) and whether the results in the current study are similar or different. For example, this prior work has indicated that efference copy or other signals that precede vocalizations can reach and influence activity in auditory areas - with the most compelling evidence for this being the modulation of activity prior to the onset of vocalizations. Was this also observed in the current study, and to what extent might this kind of mechanism contribute to the processing of feedback distortions? With respect to this kind of efference signal, or other possibilities, can the authors provide some discussion or speculation about possible mechanisms that might be differentially engaged between conditions of singing directed versus undirected song?

3c. The previous study on DAF responses in VTA indicates enhanced responses to female calls during directed song. To what extent did the current study control for any vocalizations or other sounds produced by females during the directed singing, and could this have contributed to differences in Field L activity between conditions? This question is motivated partly by the highly variable responses in raster plots even within one condition - might some of this reflect motifs during which transient noises are produced from female calling or other movements by the male or female?

More regarding stability of recordings:

The data presented in Figure 1D illustrate some of my concerns about the stationarity of recordings. In the directed condition there are no spikes at all following the first handful of motif renditions. Were the directed and undirected recordings interleaved here? If not, could the recorded neuron simply have been lost, changed in amplitude of recorded spikes so that it was no longer counted, or reduced its responsiveness over the course of the recordings? Because the recordings of undirected and directed singing are described as occurring sequentially, it seems likely that this type of change in recorded signal could contribute to changes in measured responses over time, independently of effects due to directed versus undirected singing.

A minor issue of this example is that the raw example trace with male alone does not seem to have a corresponding set of points in the roster plot. For panel E, I also cannot find rasters that correspond to the example recordings shown at top.

Figure 2A also shows a neuron that looks like it has non-stationarity; for the alone condition without altered feedback, the main peak has no spikes for the bottom half of the rasters. For the directed condition, much of the difference between control and distorted feedback conditions seems to come from a few trials towards the bottom of the raster plot that show more and earlier firing than most other rasters.

Other more subtle examples are suggested in the figures, such as Figure 1F where responses in the alone condition seem to increase over the course of recordings. A related issue apparent in some of the raster plots is that the firing rate distributions within a given condition sometimes appear to be very non-gaussian, with some motifs during which there is a lot of activity, or apparent bursting, and others in which there is little activity. In addition to the examples above, this includes<br /> responses in Fig 1E and Fig 2F. Does anything distinguish these cases or trails? Where differences between conditions are driven by firing differences that are present on only a subset of trials, such as in Fig 2A, there is some deviation from the normal criteria for use of T-tests/Z-scores. Please consider this point and discuss any caveats and/or apply other tests (Monte Carlo? Non-parametric?) as appropriate.

These potential issues of non-stationarily, and non-Gaussian firing rate distributions in each condition, make it complicated to think about what differences in activity reflect changes from undirected to directed conditions versus these other factors.

Approaches to addressing this issue could include more specifically indicating examples in which recordings from the alone condition and directed condition are interleaved and exhibit reversible (between conditions) changes in the pattern of responses (both without DAF in comparing alone versus directed, and with DAF demonstrating differences in DAF influences between conditions). Some good interleaved examples of this sort would be very helpful to illustrate the robustness of differences between conditions. More generally, the methods and or raster plots should include some further explanation of the time periods over which recordings were made in the alone versus directed conditions, and the extent to which they are interleaved or not.

Another approach that could be used if there are not many instances of inter-leaved recordings is to try to document the stationarily or stability of unit isolation and/or responses over time. It would be most helpful when applied to recordings from a given singing condition (i.e. alone or directed) that are interleaved, but even in cases where this is not possible perhaps one could assess the stability of waveforms and unit isolation across time. For example in Figure 2 - Supplementary figure 2, the left-hand and middle examples appear to have quite good unit isolation, and might be the sorts of cases where measures of unit isolation and waveform stability could be used to argue that a gain or loss of spikes due to drift in recordings or changes to SNR and spike detection are not contributing to changes in firing patterns over time (and across conditions).

It potentially would also be informative to present the prevalence of the main effects reported in the study as a function of some measures of unit isolation, SNR, and recording stability. It would be reassuring to see that significant differences between conditions are equally or more prevalent under the conditions of greatest unit isolation and recording stability than in cases with worse SNR or stability.

One other way that the authors might be able to address my main concern would be to look at the stability of firing patterns within conditions, where differences across trials most directly indicate the potential contributions of technical or biological changes in neural activity over time that are not related to the experimental conditions.

To further address some of these issues, it would be helpful to have additional explanations in this paper (rather than by reference to Goldberg and Fee, 2010) of the criteria that were used for counting spikes, and assessing stability of recordings. All I found about this in the Goldberg and Fee, 2010 reference was that "Spikes were sorted off-line using custom Matlab software" Does this require human inspection and judgment? Is there a simple threshold, or waveform measurement used for detecting spikes from single units? Are some sort of signal to noise measures, or ISI violations used to score how well units are isolated?

For the specific examples shown in figures, it would be useful to indicate by small tick marks or otherwise which spikes were counted as single units. For example in figure 2 column B, for the condition with female, did only the 1-3 largest spikes get counted, or also the spikes of medium height?

Page 11: "Many channels on the probes recorded multi-unit activity, which were taken note of but not analyzed in this study."

What were the criteria for this? For several of the examples in the figures there are spikes of varying amplitudes and as mentioned above it would be helpful to clarify how the spikes were sorted into single units in such cases.

Categorical scores:

Page 13: "Neurons with error responses greater than 2.5 in only one condition (undirected versus directed) were considered to have retuned; neurons with error scores greater than 2.5 in both conditions were considered not to have retuned."

This definition results in cases where responses of 2.45 vs 2.55 are described as 'retuned', even if these responses are not significantly different. The figure (Figure 2 - figure supplement 1) indicates that multiple neurons that were scored as retuning had responses that fall very near the threshold in this way.

Page 13, "Our results did not fundamentally change with ... a more stringent threshold of 3..."

The stringency is not issue here, rather the categorical threshold. Retuning would be more persuasively demonstrated if the authors could provide a test of whether or not the responses for individual neurons differ significantly between conditions appropriately taking into account multiple comparisons, stability of recordings, non-Gaussian firing rate distributions across motif renditions, etc. and use this metric to report effects, rather than setting a categorical threshold.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Through an unbiased genomewide KO screen, the authors identified loss of DBT to suppress MG132-mediated death of cultured RPE cells. Further analyses suggested that DBT reduces ubiquitinated proteins by promoting autophagy. Mechanistic studies indicated that DBT loss promotes autophagy via AMPK and its downstream ULK and mTOR signaling. Furthermore, loss of DBT suppresses polyglutamine- or TDP-43-mediated cytotoxicity and/or neurodegeneration in fly models. Finally, the authors showed that DBT proteins are increased in ALS patient tissues, compared to non-neurological controls.

Strengths:<br /> The idea is novel, the evidence is mostly convincing, and the data are clean. The findings have implications for human diseases.

Weaknesses:<br /> More experiments are needed to establish the connections between DBT and autophagy. The mechanistic studies are somewhat biased, and it's unclear whether the same mechanism (i.e., AMPK-->mTOR) can be applied to TDP-43-mediated neurodegeneration. Also, some data interpretation has to be more accurate.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Hwang, Ran-Der et al utilized a CRISPR-Cas9 knockout in human retinal pigment epithelium (RPE1) cells to evaluate for suppressors of toxicity by the proteasome inhibitor MG132 and identified that knockout of dihydrolipoamide branched chain transacylase E2 (DBT) suppressed cell death. They show that DBT knockout in RPE1 cells does not alter proteasome or autophagy function at baseline. However, with MG132 treatment, they show a reduction in ubiquitinated proteins but with no change in proteasome function. Instead, they show that DBT knockout cells treated with MG132 have improved autophagy flux compared to wildtype cells treated with MG132. They show that MG132 treatment decreases ATP/ADP ratios to a greater extent in DBT knockout cells, and in accordance causes activation of AMPK. They then show downstream altered autophagy signaling in DBT knockout cells treated with MG132 compared to wild-type cells treated with MG132. Then they express the ALS mutant TDP43 M337 or expanded polyglutamine repeats to model Huntington's disease and show that knockdown of DBT improves cell survival in RPE1 cells with improved autophagic flux. They also utilize a Drosophila model and show that utilizing either a RNAi or CRISPR-Cas9 knockout of DBT improves eye pigment in TDP43M337V and polyglutamine repeat-expressing transgenic flies. Finally, they show evidence for increased DBT in postmortem spinal cord tissue from patients with ALS via both immunoblotting and immunofluorescence.

Strengths:<br /> This is a mechanistic and well-designed paper that identifies DBT as a novel regulator of proteotoxicity via activating autophagy in the setting of proteasome inhibition. Major strengths include careful delineation of a mechanistic pathway to define how DBT is protective. These conclusions are largely justified, but additional experiments and information would be useful to clarify and extend these conclusions.

Weaknesses:<br /> The large majority of the experiments are evaluating suppression of drug (MG132) toxicity in an in vitro epithelial cell line, so the generalizability to disease is unclear. Indeed, MG132 itself has been shown to modulate autophagy, and off-target effects of MG132 are not addressed. While this paper is strengthened by the inclusion of mouse-induced motor neurons, Drosophila models, and postmortem tissue, the putative mechanisms are minimally evaluated in these models.

Also, this effect is only seen with MG132 treatment, at a dose that causes markedly impaired cell survival. In this setting, it is certainly plausible that changes in autophagy could be the result of differences in cell survival, as opposed to an underlying mechanism for cell survival. Additional controls would be useful to increase confidence that DBT knockdown is protective via modulation of autophagy.

While the authors report increased DBT in postmortem ALS tissue as suggestive that DBT may modulate proteotoxicity in neurodegeneration, this point would be better supported with the evaluation of overexpression of DBT in their model.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this work, Xie, Prescott, and colleagues have reevaluated the role of Nav1.7 in nociceptive sensory neuron excitability. They find that nociceptors can make use of different sodium channel subtypes to reach equivalent excitability. The existence of this degeneracy is critical to understanding neuronal physiology under normal and pathological conditions and could explain why Nav subtype-selective drugs have failed in clinical trials. More concretely, nociceptor repetitive spiking relies on Nav1.8 at DIV0 (and probably under normal conditions in vivo), but on Nav1.7 and Nav1.3 at DIV4-7 (and after inflammation in vivo).

The conclusions of this paper are mostly well supported by data, and these findings should be of broad interest to scientists working on pain, drug development, neuronal excitability, and ion channels.

Strengths:<br /> The authors have employed elegant electrophysiology experiments (including specific pharmacology and dynamic clamp) and computational simulations to study the excitability of a subpopulation of DRGs that would very likely match with nociceptors (they take advantage of using transgenic mice to detect Nav1.8-expressing neurons). They make a strong point showing the degeneracy that occurs at the ion channel expression level in nociceptors, adding this new data to previous observations in other neuronal types. They also demonstrate that the different Nav subtypes functionally overlap and are able to interchange their "typical" roles in action potential generation. As Xie, Prescott, and colleagues argue, the functional implications of the degenerate character of nociceptive sensory neuron excitability need to be seriously taken into account regarding drug development and clinical trials with Nav subtype-selective inhibitors.

Weaknesses:<br /> The next comments are minor criticisms, as the major conclusions of the paper are well substantiated. Most of the results presented in the article have been obtained from experiments with DRG neuron cultures, and surely there is a greater degree of complexity and heterogeneity about the degeneracy of nociceptors excitability in the "in vivo" condition. Indeed, the authors show in Figures 7 and 8 data that support their hypothesis and an increased Nav1.7's influence on nociceptor excitability after inflammation, but also a higher variability in the nociceptors spiking responses. On the other hand, DRG neurons targeted in this study (YFP (+) after crossing with Nav1.8-Cre mice) are >90% nociceptors, but not all nociceptors express Nav1.8 in vivo. As shown by Li et al., 2016 ("Somatosensory neuron types identified by high-coverage single-cell RNA-sequencing and functional heterogeneity"), there is a high heterogeneity of neuron subtypes within sensory neurons. Therefore, some caution should be taken when translating the results obtained with the DRG neuron cultures to the more complex "in vivo" panorama.

Although the authors have focused their attention on Nav channels, it should be noted that degeneracy concerning other ion channels (such as potassium ion channels) could also impact the nociceptor excitability. The action potential AHP in Figure 1, panel A is very different comparing the DIV0 (blue) and DIV4-7 examples. Indeed, the conductance density values for the AHP current are higher at DIV0 than at DIV7 in the computational model (supplementary table 5). The role of other ion channels in order to obtain equivalent excitability should not be underestimated.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors have noted in preliminary work that tetrodotoxin (TTX), which inhibits NaV1.7 and several other TTX-sensitive sodium channels, has differential effects on nociceptors, dramatically reducing their excitability under certain conditions but not under others. Partly because of this coincidental observation, the aim of the present work was to re-examine or characterize the role of NaV1.7 in nociceptor excitability and its effects on drug efficacy. The manuscript demonstrates that a NaV1.7-selective inhibitor produces analgesia only when nociceptor excitability is based on NaV1.7. More generally and comprehensively, the results show that nociceptors can achieve equivalent excitability through changes in differential NaV inactivation and NaV expression of different NaV subtypes (NaV 1.3/1.7 and 1.8). This can cause widespread changes in the role of a particular subtype over time. The degenerate nature of nociceptor excitability shows functional implications that make the assignment of pathological changes to a particular NaV subtype difficult or even impossible.

Thus, the analgesic efficacy of NaV1.7- or NaV1.8-selective agents depends essentially on which NaV subtype controls excitability at a given time point. These results explain, at least in part, the poor clinical outcomes with the use of subtype-selective NaV inhibitors and therefore have major implications for the future development of Nav-selective analgesics.

Strengths:<br /> The above results are clearly and impressively supported by the experiments and data shown. All methods are described in detail, presumably allow good reproducibility, and were suitable to address the corresponding question. The only exception is the description of the computer model, which should be described in more detail.

The results showing that nociceptors can achieve equivalent excitability through changes in differential NaV inactivation and expression of different NaV subtypes are of great importance in the fields of basic and clinical pain research and sodium channel physiology and pharmacology, but also for a broad readership and community. The degenerate nature of nociceptor excitability, which is clearly shown and well supported by data has large functional implications. The results are of great importance because they may explain, at least in part, the poor clinical outcomes with the use of subtype-selective NaV inhibitors and therefore have major implications for the future development of Nav-selective analgesics.

In summary, the authors achieved their overall aim to enlighten the role of NaV1.7 in nociceptor excitability and the effects on drug efficacy. The data support the conclusions, although the clinical implications could be highlighted in a more detailed manner.

Weaknesses:<br /> As mentioned before, the results that nociceptors can achieve equivalent excitability through changes in differential NaV inactivation and NaV expression of different NaV subtypes are impressive. However, there is some "gap" between the DRG culture experiments and acutely dissociated DRGs from mice after CFA injection. In the extensive experiments with cultured DRG neurons, different time points after dissociation were compared. Although it would have been difficult for functional testing to examine additional time points (besides DIV0 and DIV4-7), at least mRNA and protein levels should have been determined at additional time points (DIV) to examine the time course or whether gene expression (mRNA) or membrane expression (protein) changes slowly and gradually or rapidly and more abruptly. It would also be interesting to clarify whether the changes that occur in culture (DIV0 vs. DIV4-7) are accompanied by (pro-)inflammatory changes in gene and protein expression, such as those known for nociceptors after CFA injection. This would better link the following data demonstrating that in acutely dissociated nociceptors after CFA injection, the inflammation-induced increase in NaV1.7 membrane expression enhances the effect of (or more neurons respond to) the NaV1.7 inhibitor PF-71, whereas fewer CFA neurons respond to the NaV1.8 inhibitor PF-24.

The results shown explain, at least in part, the poor clinical outcomes with the use of subtype-selective NaV inhibitors and therefore have important implications for the future development of Nav-selective analgesics. However, this point, which is also evident from the title of the manuscript, is discussed only superficially with respect to clinical outcomes. In particular, the promising role of NaV1.7, which plays a role in nociceptor hyperexcitability but not in "normal" neurons, should be discussed in light of clinical results and not just covered with a citation of a review. Which clinical results of NaV1.7-selective drugs can now be better explained and how?

Another point directly related to the previous one, which should at least be discussed, is that all the data are from rodents, or in this case from mice, and this should explain the clinical data in humans. Even if "impediment to translation" is briefly mentioned in a slightly different context, one could (as mentioned above) discuss in more detail which human clinical data support the existence of "equivalent excitability through different sodium channels" also in humans.

Although speculative, it would be interesting for readers to know whether a treatment regimen based on "time since injury" with NaV1.7 and NaV1.8 inhibitors might offer benefits. Based on the data, could one hypothesize that NaV1.7 inhibitors are more likely to benefit (albeit in the short term) in patients with neuropathic pain with better patient selection (e.g., defined interval between injury and treatment)?

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this study, the authors used patch-clamp to characterize the implication of various voltage-gated Na+ channels in the firing properties of mouse nociceptive sensory neurons. They report that depending on the culture conditions NaV1.3, NaV1.7, and NaV1.8 have distinct contributions to action potential firing and that similar firing patterns can result from distinct relative roles of these channels. The findings may be relevant for the design of better strategies targeting NaV channels to treat pain.

Strengths:<br /> The paper addresses the important issue of understanding, from an interesting perspective, the lack of success of therapeutic strategies targeting NaV channels in the context of pain. Specifically, the authors test the hypothesis that different NaV channels contribute in a plastic manner to action potential firing, which may be the reason why it is difficult to target pain by inhibiting these channels. The experiments seem to have been properly performed and most conclusions are justified. The paper is concisely written and easy to follow.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1) The most critical issue I find in the manuscript is the claim that different combinations of NaV channels result in equivalent excitability. For example, in the Abstract it is stated that: "...we show that nociceptors can achieve equivalent excitability using different combinations of NaV1.3, NaV1.7, and NaV1.8". The gating properties of these channels are not identical, and therefore their contributions to excitability should not be the same. I think that the culprit of this issue is that the authors reach their conclusion from the comparison of the (average) firing rate determined over 1 s current stimulation in distinct conditions. However, this is not the only parameter that determines how sensory neurons convey information. For instance, the time dependence of the instantaneous frequency, the actual firing pattern, may be important too. Moreover, the use of 1 s of current stimulation might not be sufficient to characterize the firing pattern if one wants to obtain conclusions that could translate to clinical settings (i.e., sustained pain). A neuron in which NaV1.7 is the main contributor is expected to have a damping firing pattern due to cumulative channel inactivation, whereas another depending mainly on NaV1.8 is expected to display more sustained firing. This is actually seen in the results of the modelling.

2) In Fig. 1, is 100 nM TTX sufficient to inhibit all TTX-sensitive NaV currents? More common in literature values to fully inhibit these currents are between 300 to 500 nM. The currents shown as TTX-sensitive in Fig. 1D look very strange (not like the ones at Baseline DIV4-7). It seems that 100 nM TTX was not enough, leading to an underestimation of the amplitude of the TTX-sensitive currents.

3) Page 8, the authors conclude that "Inflammation caused nociceptors to become much more variable in their reliance of specific NaV subtypes". However, how did the authors ensure that all neurons tested were affected by the CFA model? It could be that the heterogeneity in neuron properties results from distinct levels of effects of CFA.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This is an interesting study of the nature of representations across the visual field. The question of how peripheral vision differs from foveal vision is a fascinating and important one. The majority of our visual field is extra-foveal yet our sensory and perceptual capabilities decline in pronounced and well-documented ways away from the fovea. Part of the decline is thought to be due to spatial averaging ('pooling') of features. Here, the authors contrast two models of such feature pooling with human judgments of image content. They use much larger visual stimuli than in most previous studies, and some sophisticated image synthesis methods to tease apart the prediction of the distinct models.

More importantly, in so doing, the researchers thoroughly explore the general approach of probing visual representations through metamers-stimuli that are physically distinct but perceptually indistinguishable. The work is embedded within a rigorous and general mathematical framework for expressing equivalence classes of images and how visual representations influence these. They describe how image-computable models can be used to make predictions about metamers, which can then be compared to make inferences about the underlying sensory representations. The main merit of the work lies in providing a formal framework for reasoning about metamers and their implications, for comparing models of sensory processing in terms of the metamers that they predict, and for mapping such models onto physiology. Importantly, they also consider the limits of what can be inferred about sensory processing from metamers derived from different models.

Overall, the work is of a very high standard and represents a significant advance over our current understanding of perceptual representations of image structure at different locations across the visual field. The authors do a good job of capturing the limits of their approach and I particularly appreciated the detailed and thoughtful Discussion section and the suggestion to extend the metamer-based approach described in the MS with observer models. The work will have an impact on researchers studying many different aspects of visual function including texture perception, crowding, natural image statistics, and the physiology of low- and mid-level vision.

The main weaknesses of the original submission relate to the writing. A clearer motivation could have been provided for the specific models that they consider, and the text could have been written in a more didactic and easy-to-follow manner. The authors could also have been more explicit about the assumptions that they make.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary<br /> This paper expands on the literature on spatial metamers, evaluating different aspects of spatial metamers including the effect of different models and initialization conditions, as well as the relationship between metamers of the human visual system and metamers for a model. The authors conduct psychophysics experiments testing variations of metamer synthesis parameters including type of target image, scaling factor, and initialization parameters, and also compare two different metamer models (luminance vs energy). An additional contribution is doing this for a field of view larger than has been explored previously.

General Comments<br /> Overall, this paper addresses some important outstanding questions regarding comparing original to synthesized images in metamer experiments and begins to explore the effect of noise vs image seed on the resulting syntheses. While the paper tests some model classes that could be better motivated, and the results are not particularly groundbreaking, the contributions are convincing and undoubtedly important to the field. The paper includes an interesting Voronoi-like schematic of how to think about perceptual metamers, which I found helpful, but for which I do have some questions and suggestions. I also have some major concerns regarding incomplete psychophysical methodology including lack of eye-tracking, results inferred from a single subject, and a huge number of trials. I have only minor typographical criticisms and suggestions to improve clarity. The authors also use very good data reproducibility practices.

Specific Comments

Experimental Setup<br /> Firstly, the experiments do not appear to utilize an eye tracker to monitor fixation. Without eye tracking or another manipulation to ensure fixation, we cannot ensure the subjects were fixating the center of the image, and viewing the metamer as intended. While the short stimulus time (200ms) can help minimize eye movements, this does not guarantee that subjects began the trial with correct fixation, especially in such a long experiment. While Covid-19 did at one point limit in-person eye-tracked experiments, the paper reports no such restrictions that would have made the addition of eye-tracking impossible. While such a large-scale experiment may be difficult to repeat with the addition of eye tracking, the paper would be greatly improved with, at a minimum, an explanation as to why eye tracking was not included.

Secondly, many of the comparisons later in the paper (Figures 9,10) are made from a single subject. N=1 is not typically accepted as sufficient to draw conclusions in such a psychophysics experiment. Again, if there were restrictions limiting this it should be discussed. Also (P11) Is subject sub-00 is this an author? Other expert? A naive subject? The subject's expertise in viewing metamers will likely affect their performance.

Finally, the number of trials per subject is quite large. 13,000 over 9 sessions is much larger than most human experiments in this area. The reason for this should be justified.

Model<br /> For the main experiment, the authors compare the results of two models: a 'luminance model' that spatially pools mean luminance values, and an 'energy model' that spatially pools energy calculated from a multi-scale pyramid decomposition. They show that these models create metamers that result in different thresholds for human performance, and therefore different critical scaling parameters, with the basic luminance pooling model producing a scaling factor 1/4 that of the energy model. While this is certain to be true, due to the luminance model being so much simpler, the motivation for the simple luminance-based model as a comparison is unclear.

The authors claim that this luminance model captures the response of retinal ganglion cells, often modeled as a center-surround operation (Rodieck, 1964). I am unclear in what aspect(s) the authors claim these center-surround neurons mimic a simple mean luminance, especially in the context of evidence supporting a much more complex role of RGCs in vision (Atick & Redlich, 1992). Why do the authors not compare the energy model to a model that captures center-surround responses instead? Do the authors mean to claim that the luminance model captures only the pooling aspects of an RGC model? This is particularly confusing as Figures 6 and 9 show the luminance and energy models for original vs synth aligning with the scaling of Midget and Parasol RGCs, respectively. These claims should be more clearly stated, and citations included to motivate this. Similarly, with the energy model, the physiological evidence is very loosely connected to the model discussed.

Prior Work:<br /> While the explorations in this paper clearly have value, it does not present any particularly groundbreaking results, and those reported are consistent with previous literature. The explorations around critical eccentricity measurement have been done for texture models (Figure 11) in multiple papers (Freeman 2011, Wallis, 2019, Balas 2009). In particular, Freeman 20111 demonstrated that simpler models, representing measurements presumed to occur earlier in visual processing need smaller pooling regions to achieve metamerism. This work's measurements for the simpler models tested here are consistent with those results, though the model details are different. In addition, Brown, 2023 (which is miscited) also used an extended field of view (though not as large as in this work). Both Brown 2023, and Wallis 2019 performed an exploration of the effect of the target image. Also, much of the more recent previous work uses color images, while the author's exploration is only done for greyscale.

Discussion of Prior Work:<br /> The prior work on testing metamerism between original vs. synthesized and synthesized vs. synthesized images is presented in a misleading way. Wallis et al.'s prior work on this should not be a minor remark in the post-experiment discussion. Rather, it was surely a motivation for the experiment. The text should make this clear; a discussion of Wallis et al. should appear at the start of that section. The authors similarly cite much of the most relevant literature in this area as a minor remark at the end of the introduction (P3L72).

White Noise:<br /> The authors make an analogy to the inability of humans to distinguish samples of white noise. It is unclear however that human difficulty distinguishing samples of white noise is a perceptual issue- It could instead perhaps be due to cognitive/memory limitations. If one concentrates on an individual patch one can usually tell apart two samples. Support for these difficulties emerging from perceptual limitations, or a discussion of the possibility of these limitations being more cognitive should be discussed, or a different analogy employed.

Relatedly, in Figure 14, the authors do not explain why the white noise seeds would be more likely to produce syntheses that end up in different human equivalence classes.

It would be nice to see the effect of pink noise seeds, which mirror the power spectrum of natural images, but do not contain the same structure as natural images - this may address the artifacts noted in Figure 9b.

Finally, the authors note high-frequency artifacts in Figure 4 & P5L135, that remain after syntheses from the luminance model. They hypothesize that this is due to a lack of constraints on frequencies above that defined by the pooling region size. Could these be addressed with a white noise image seed that is pre-blurred with a low pass filter removing the frequencies above the spatial frequency constrained at the given eccentricity?

Schematic of metamerism:<br /> Figures 1,2,12, and 13 show a visual schematic of the state space of images, and their relationship to both model and human metamers. This is depicted as a Voronoi diagram, with individual images near the center of each shape, and other images that fall at different locations within the same cell producing the same human visual system response. I felt this conceptualization was helpful. However, implicitly it seems to make a distinction between metamerism and JND (just noticeable difference). I felt this would be better made explicit. In the case of JND, neighboring points, despite having different visual system responses, might not be distinguishable to a human observer.

In these diagrams and throughout the paper, the phrase 'visual stimulus' rather than 'image' would improve clarity, because the location of the stimulus in relation to the fovea matters whereas the image can be interpreted as the pixels displayed on the computer.

Other<br /> The authors show good reproducibility practices with links to relevant code, datasets, and figures.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

To further understand the plasticity of vestibular compensation, Schenberg et al. sought to characterize the response of the vestibular system to short-term and partial impairment using gaze stabilization behaviors. A transient ototoxic protocol affected type I hair cells and produced gain changes in the vestibulo-ocular reflex and optokinetic response. Interestingly, decreases in vestibular function occurred in coordination with an increase in ocular reflex gain at frequencies where vestibular information is more highly weighted over visual. Moreover, computational approaches revealed unexpected detriment from low reproducibility on combined gaze responses. These results inform the current understanding of visual-vestibular integration especially in the face of dysfunction.

Strengths<br /> The manuscript takes advantage of VOR measurements that can be activated by targeted organs, are used in many species including clinically, and indicate additional adverse effects of vestibular dysfunction.

The authors use a variety of experimental procedures and analysis methods to verify results and consider individual performance effects on the population data.

The conclusions are well-justified by current data and supported by previous research and theories of visuo-vestibular function and plasticity.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This is a very nice study showing how partial loss of vestibular function leads to long term alterations in behavioural responses of mice. Specifically, the authors show that VOR involving both canal and otolith afferents are strongly attenuated following treatment and partially recover. The main result is that loss of VOR is partially "compensated" by increased OKR in treated animals. Finally, the authors show that treatment primarily affects type I hair cells as opposed to type II hair cells. Overall, these results have important implications for our understanding of how the VOR Is generated using input from both type I and type II hair cells.

The major strength of the study lies in the use of partial inactivation of hair cells to look at the effects on behaviors such as VOR and OKR. Some weaknesses stem from the fact that the effects of inactivation are highly variable across specimens and that there is no recovery of behavioral function.

Reviewer #1 Public Review:

Summary:<br /> This study examines to what extent this phenomenon varies based on the visibility of the saccade target. Visibility is defined as the contrast level of the target with respect to the noise background, and it is related to the signal-to-noise ratio of the target. A more visible target facilitates the oculomotor behavior planning and execution, however, as speculated by the authors, it can also benefit foveal prediction even if the foveal stimulus visibility is maintained constant. Remarkably, the authors show that presenting a highly visible saccade target is beneficial for foveal vision as the detection of stimuli with an orientation similar to that of the saccade target is improved, the lower the saccade target visibility, the less prominent the effect.

Strengths:<br /> The results are convincing and the research methodology is technically sound.

Weaknesses:<br /> Discussion on how this phenomenon may unfold in natural viewing conditions when the foveal and saccade target stimuli are complex and are constituted by different visual properties is lacking. Some speculations regarding feedforward vs feedback neural processing involved in the phenomenon and the speed of the feedforward signal in relation to the visibility of the target, are not well justified and not clearly supported by the data.

Reviewer #2 Public Review:

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, the authors ran a dual task. Subjects monitored a peripheral location for a target onset (to generate a saccade to), and they also monitored a foveal location for a foveal probe. The foveal probe could be congruent or incongruent with the orientation of the peripheral target. In this study, the authors manipulated the conspicuity of the peripheral target, and they saw changes in performance in the foveal task. However, the changes were somewhat counterintuitive.

Strengths:<br /> The authors use solid analysis methods and careful experimental design.

Weaknesses:<br /> I have some issues with the interpretation of the results, as explained below. In general, I feel that a lot of effects are being explained by attention and target-probe onset asynchrony etc, but this seems to be against the idea put forth by the authors of "foveal prediction for visual continuity across saccades". Why would foveal prediction be so dependent on such other processes? This needs to be better clarified and justified.

Specifics:<br /> The explanation of decreased hit rates with increased peripheral target opacity is not convincing. The authors suggest that higher contrast stimuli in the periphery attract attention. But, then, why are the foveal results occurring earlier (as per the later descriptions in the manuscript)? And, more importantly, why would foveal prediction need to be weaker with stronger pre-saccadic attention to the periphery? What is the function of foveal prediction? What of the other interpretation that could be invoked in general for this type of task used by the authors: that the dual task is challenging and that subjects somehow misattribute what they saw in the peripheral task when planning the saccade. i.e. foveal hit rates are misperceptions of the peripheral target. When the peripheral target is easier to see, then the foveal hit rate drops.

The analyses of Fig. 3C appear to be overly convoluted. They also imply an acknowledgment by the authors that target-probe temporal difference matters. Doesn't this already negate the idea that the foveal effects are associated with the saccade generation process itself? If the effect is related to target onset, how is it interpreted as related to a foveal prediction that is associated with the saccade itself? Also, the oscillatory nature of the effect in Fig. 3C for 59% and 90% opacity is quite confusing and not addressed. The authors simply state that enhancement occurs earlier before the saccade for higher contrasts. But, this is not entirely true. The enhancement emerges then disappears and then emerges again leading up to the saccade. Why would foveal prediction do that?

The interpretation of Fig. 4 is also confusing. Doesn't the longer latency already account for the lapse in attention, such that visual continuity can proceed normally now that the saccade is actually eventually made? In all results, it seems that the effects are all related to the dual nature of the task and/or attention, rather than to the act of making the saccade itself. Why should visual continuity (when a saccade is actually made, whether with short or long latency) have different "fidelity"? And, isn't this disruptive to the whole idea of visual continuity in the first place?

Small question: is it just me or does the data in general seem to be too excessively smoothed?

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, the authors have applied an asymmetric split mNeonGreen2 (mNG2) system to human iPSCs. Integrating a constitutively expressed long fragment of mNG2 at the AAVS1 locus, allows other proteins to be tagged through the use of available ssODN donors. This removes the need to generate long AAV donors for tagging, thus greatly facilitating high-throughput tagging efforts. The authors then demonstrate the feasibility of the method by successfully tagging 9 markers expressed in iPSC at various, and one expressed upon endoderm differentiation. Several additional differentiation markers were also successfully tagged but not subsequently tested for expression/visibility. As one might expect for high-throughput tagging, a few proteins, while successfully tagged at the genomic level, failed to be visible. Finally, to demonstrate the utility of the tagged cells, the authors isolated clones with genes relevant to cytokinesis tagged, and together with an AI to enhance signal-to-noise ratios, monitored their localization over cell division.

Strengths:<br /> Characterization of the mNG2 tagged parental iPSC line was well and carefully done including validation of a single integration, the presence of markers for continued pluripotency, selected off-target analysis, and G-banding-based structural rearrangement detection.

The ability to tag proteins with simple ssODNs in iPSC capable of multi-lineage differentiation will undoubtedly be useful for localization tracking and reporter line generation.

Validation of clone genotypes was carefully performed and highlights the continued need for caution with regard to editing outcomes.

Weaknesses:<br /> IF and flow cytometry figures lack quantification and information on replication. How consistent is the brightness and localization of the markers? How representative are the specific images? Stability is mentioned in the text but data on the stability of expression/brightness is not shown.

The localization of markers, while consistent with expectations, is not validated by a second technique such as antibody staining, and in many cases not even with Hoechst to show nuclear vs cytoplasmic.

For the multi-germ layer differentiation validation, NCAM is also expressed by ectoderm, so isn't a good solo marker for mesoderm as it was used. Indeed, the kit used for the differentiation suggests Brachyury combined with either NCAM or CXCR4, not NCAM alone.

Only a single female parental line has been generated and characterized. It would have been useful to have several lines and both male and female to allow sex differences to be explored.

The AI-based signal-to-noise enhancement needs more details and testing. Such models can introduce strong assumptions and thus artefacts into the resolved data. Was the model trained on all markers or were multiple models trained on a single marker each? For example, if trained to enhance a single marker (or co-localized group of markers), it could introduce artefacts where it forces signal localization to those areas even for others. What happens if you feed in images with scrambled pixel locations, does it still say the structures are where the training data says they should be? What about markers with different localization from the training set? If you feed those in, does it force them to the location expected by the training data or does it retain their differential true localization and simply enhance the signal?

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors have generated human iPSC cells constitutively expressing the mNG21-10 and tested them by endogenous tagging multiple genes with mNG211 (several tagged iPS cell lines clones were isolated). With this tool, they have explored several weakly expressed cytokinesis genes and gained insights into how cytokinesis occurs.

Strengths:<br /> Human iPSC cells are used.

Weaknesses:<br /> i) The manuscript is extremely incremental, no improvements are present in the split-fluorescent (split-FP) protein variant used nor in the approach for endogenous tagging with split-FPs (both of them are already very well established and used in literature as well as in different cell types).

ii) The fluorescence intensity of the split mNeonGreen appears rather low, for example in Figure 2C the H2BC11, ANLN, SOX2, and TUBB3 signals are very noisy (differences between the structures observed are almost absent). For low-expression targets, this is an important limitation. This is also stated by the authors but image restoration could not be the best solution since a lot of biologically relevant information will be lost anyway.

iii) There is no comparison with other existing split-FP variants, methods, or imaging and it is unclear what the advantages of the system are.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The authors report on the engineering of an induced Pluripotent Stem Cell (iPSC) line that harbours a single copy of a split mNeonGreen, mNG2(1-10). This cell line is subsequently used to take endogenous protein with a smaller part of mNeonGreen, mNG2(11), enabling the complementation of mNG into a fluorescent protein that is then used to visualize the protein. The parental cell is validated and used to construct several iPSC lines with endogenously tagged proteins. These are used to visualize and quantify endogenous protein localisation during mitosis.

I see the advantage of tagging endogenous loci with small fragments, but the complementation strategy has disadvantages that deserve some attention. One potential issue is the level of the mNG2(1-10). Is it clear that the current level is saturating? Based on the data in Figure S3, the expression levels and fluorescence intensity levels show a similar dose-dependency which is reassuring, but not definitive proof that all the mNG2(11)-tagged protein is detected.

Do the authors see a difference in fluorescence intensity for homo- and heterozygous cell lines that have the same protein tagged with mNG2(11)? One would expect two-fold differences, or not?

Related to this, would it be favourable to have a homozygous line for expressing mNG2(1-10)?

The complementation seems to work well for the proteins that are tested. Would this also work for secreted (or other organelle-resident) proteins, for which the mNG2(11) tag is localised in a membrane-enclosed compartment?

The authors present a technological advance and it would be great if others could benefit from this as well by having access to the cell lines.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors develop a method to fluorescently tag peptides loaded onto dendritic cells using a two-step method with a tetracystein motif modified peptide and labelling step done on the surface of live DC using a dye with high affinity for the added motif. The results are convincing in demonstrating in vitro and in vivo T cell activation and efficient label transfer to specific T cells in vivo. The label transfer technique will be useful to identify T cells that have recognised a DC presenting a specific peptide antigen to allow the isolation of the T cell and cloning of its TCR subunits, for example. It may also be useful as a general assay for in vitro or in vivo T-DC communication that can allow the detection of genetic or chemical modulators.

Strengths:<br /> The study includes both in vitro and in vivo analysis including flow cytometry and two-photon laser scanning microscopy. The results are convincing and the level of T cell labelling with the fluorescent pMHC is surprisingly robust and suggests that the approach is potentially revealing something about fundamental mechanisms beyond the state of the art.

Weaknesses:<br /> The method is demonstrated only at high pMHC density and it is not clear if it can operate at at lower peptide doses where T cells normally operate. However, this doesn't limit the utility of the method for applications where the peptide of interest is known. It's not clear to me how it could be used to de-orphan known TCR and this should be explained if they want to claim this as an application. Previous methods based on biotin-streptavidin and phycoerythrin had single pMHC sensitivity, but there were limitations to the PE-based probe so the use of organic dyes could offer advantages.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors here develop a novel Ovalbumin model peptide that can be labeled with a site-specific FlAsH dye to track agonist peptides both in vitro and in vivo. The utility of this tool could allow better tracking of activated polyclonal T cells particularly in novel systems. The authors have provided solid evidence that peptides are functional, capable of activating OTII T cells, and that these peptides can undergo trogocytosis by cognate T cells only.

Strengths:<br /> -An array of in vitro and in vivo studies are used to assess peptide functionality.<br /> -Nice use of cutting-edge intravital imaging.<br /> -Internal controls such as non-cogate T cells to improve the robustness of the results (such as Fig 5A-D).<br /> -One of the strengths is the direct labeling of the peptide and the potential utility in other systems.

Weaknesses:<br /> 1. What is the background signal from FlAsH?<br /> The baselines for Figure 1 flow plots are all quite different. Hard to follow. What does the background signal look like without FLASH (how much fluorescence shift is unlabeled cells to No antigen+FLASH?). How much of the FlAsH in cells is actually conjugated to the peptide? In Figure 2E, it doesn't look like it's very specific to pMHC complexes. Maybe you could double-stain with Ab for MHCII. Figure 4e suggests there is no background without MHCII but I'm not fully convinced. Potentially some MassSpec for FLASH-containing peptides.

2. On the flip side, how much of the variant peptides are getting conjugated in cells? I'd like to see some quantification (HPLC or MassSpec). If it's ~10% of peptides that get labeled, this could explain the low shifts in fluorescence and the similar T cell activation to native peptides if FlasH has any deleterious effects on TCR recognition. But if it's a high rate of labeling, then it adds confidence to this system.

3. Conceptually, what is the value of labeling peptides after loading with DCs? Why not preconjugate peptides with dye, before loading, so you have a cleaner, potentially higher fluorescence signal? If there is a potential utility, I do not see it being well exploited in this paper. There are some hints in the discussion of additional use cases, but it was not clear exactly how they would work. One mention was that the dye could be added in real-time in vivo to label complexes, but I believe this was not done here. Is that feasible to show?

4. Figure 5D-F the imaging data isn't fully convincing. For example, in 5F and 2G, the speeds for T cells with no Ag should be much higher (10-15micron/min or 0.16-0.25micron/sec). The fact that yours are much lower speeds suggests technical or biological issues, that might need to be acknowledged or use other readouts like the flow cytometry.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The authors have studied the effects of platelets in OPC biology and remyelination. For this, they used mutant mice with lower levels of platelets as a demyelinating/remyelinating scenario, as well as in a model with large numbers of circulating platelets.

Strengths:<br /> -The work is very focused, with defined objectives.<br /> -The work is properly done.

Weaknesses:<br /> -There is no clear effect on a single cell type and/or mechanism involved.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This paper examined whether circulating platelets regulate oligodendrocyte progenitor cell (OPC) differentiation for the link with multiple sclerosis (MS). They identified that the interaction with platelets enhances OPC differentiation although persistent contact inhibits the process in the long-term. The mouse model with increased platelet levels in the blood reduced mature oligodendrocytes, while how platelets might regulate OPC differentiation is not clear yet.

Strengths:<br /> The use of both partial platelet depletion and thrombocytosis mouse models gives in vivo evidence. The presentation of platelet accumulation in a time-course manner is rigorous. The in vitro co-culture model tested the role of platelets in OPC differentiation, which was supportive of in vivo observations.

Weaknesses:<br /> How platelets regulate OPC differentiation is not clear. What the significance of platelets is in MS progression is not clear.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The manuscript by Xia et al. investigated the mechanisms underlying Glucocorticoid-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head (GONFH). The authors observed that abnormal osteogenesis and adipogenesis are associated with decreased β-catenin in the necrotic femoral head of GONFH patients, and that the inhibition of β-catenin signalling leads to abnormal osteogenesis and adipogenesis in GONFH rats. Of interest, the deletion of β-catenin in Col2-expressing cells rather than in osx-expressing cells leads to a GONFH-like phenotype in the femoral head of mice.

Strengths:<br /> A strength of the study is that it sets up a Col2-expressing cell-specific β-catenin knockout mouse model that mimics the full spectrum of osteonecrosis phenotype of GONFH. This is interesting and provides new insights into the understanding of GONFH. Overall, the data are solid and support their conclusions.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, the authors reported a study to uncover that β-catenin inhibition disrupting the homeostasis of osteogenic/adipogenic differentiation contributes to the development of Glucocorticoid-induced osteonecrosis of the femoral head (GONFH). In this study, they first observed abnormal osteogenesis and adipogenesis associated with decreased β-catenin in the necrotic femoral head of GONFH patients, but the exact pathological mechanisms of GONFH remain unknown. They then performed in vivo and in vitro studies to further reveal that glucocorticoid exposure disrupted osteogenic/adipogenic differentiation bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs) by inhibiting β-catenin signaling in glucocorticoid-induced GONFH rats, and specific deletion of β-catenin in Col2+ cells shifted BMSCs commitment from osteoblasts to adipocytes, leading to a full spectrum of disease phenotype of GONFH in adult mice.

Strengths:<br /> This innovative study provides strong evidence supporting that β-catenin inhibition disrupts the homeostasis of osteogenic/adipogenic differentiation that contributes to the development of GONFH. This study also identifies an ideal genetically modified mouse model of GONFH. Overall, the experiment is logically designed, the figures are clear, and the data generated from humans and animals is abundant supporting their conclusions.

Weaknesses:<br /> There is a lack of discussion to explain how the Wnt agonist 1 works. There are several types of Wnt ligands. It is not clear if this agonist only targets Wnt1 or other Wnts as well. Also, why Wnt agonist 1 couldn't rescue the GONFH-like phenotype in β-cateninCol2ER mice needs to be discussed.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, the authors are trying to delineate the mechanism underlying the osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

Strengths:<br /> The authors provided compelling in vivo and in vitro data to demonstrate Col2+ cells and Osx+ cells were differentially expressed in the femoral head. Moreover, inducible knockout of β-catenin in Col2+ cells but not Osx+ cells lead to a GONFH-like phenotype including fat accumulation, subchondral bone destruction, and femoral head collapse, indicating that imbalance of osteogenic/adipogenic differentiation of Col2+ cells plays an important role in GONFH pathogenesis. Therefore, this manuscript provided mechanistic insights into osteonecrosis as well as potential therapeutic targets for disease treatment.

Weaknesses:<br /> However, additional in-depth discussion regarding the phenotype observed in mice is highly encouraged.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this report, Yu et al ascribe potential tumor suppressive functions to the non-core regions of RAG1/2 recombinases. Using a well-established BCR-ABL oncogene-driven system, the authors model the development of B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in mice and found that RAG mutants lacking non-core regions show accelerated leukemogenesis. They further report that the loss of non-core regions of RAG1/2 increases genomic instability, possibly caused by increased off-target recombination of aberrant RAG-induced breaks. The authors conclude that the non-core regions of RAG1 in particular not only increase the fidelity of VDJ recombination, but may also influence the recombination "range" of off-target joints, and that in the absence of the non-core regions, mutant RAG1/2 (termed cRAGs) catalyze high levels of off-target recombination leading to the development of aggressive leukemia.

Strengths:<br /> The authors used a genetically defined oncogene-driven model to study the effect of RAG non-core regions on leukemogenesis. The animal studies were well performed and generally included a good number of mice. Therefore, the finding that cRAG expression led to the development of more aggressive BCR-ABL+ leukemia compared to fRAG is solid.

Weaknesses:<br /> In general, I find the mechanistic explanation offered by the authors to explain how the non-core regions of RAG1/2 suppress leukemogenesis to be less convincing. My main concern is that cRAG1 and cRAG2 are overexpressed relative to fRAG1/2. This raises the possibility that the observed increased aggressiveness of cRAG tumors compared to fRAG tumors could be solely due to cRAG1/2 overexpression, rather than any intrinsic differences in the activity of cRAG1/2 vs fRAG1/2; and indeed, the authors allude to this possibility in Fig S8, where it was shown that elevated expression of RAG (i.e. fRAG) correlated with decreased survival in pediatric ALL. Although it doesn't mean the authors' assertions are incorrect, this potential caveat should nevertheless be discussed.

Some of the conclusions drawn were not supported by the data.<br /> 1. I'm not sure that the authors can conclude based on μHC expression that there is a loss of pre-BCR checkpoint in cRAG tumors. In fact, Fig. 2B showed that the differences are not statistically significant overall, and more importantly, μHC expression should be detectable in small pre-B cells (CD43-). This is also corroborated by the authors' analysis of VDJ rearrangements, showing that it has occurred at the H chain locus in cRAG cells.

2. The authors found a high degree of polyclonal VDJ rearrangements in fRAG tumor cells but a much more limited oligoclonal VDJ repertoire in cRAG tumors. They concluded that this explains why cRAG tumors are more aggressive because BCR-ABL induced leukemia requires secondary oncogenic hits, resulting in the outgrowth of a few dominant clones (Page 19, lines 381-398). I'm not sure this is necessarily a causal relationship since we don't know if the oligoclonality of cRAG tumors is due to selection based on oncogenic potential or if it may actually reflect a more restricted usage of different VDJ gene segments during rearrangement.

3. What constitutes a cancer gene can be highly context- and tissue-dependent. Given that there is no additional information on how any putative cancer gene was disrupted (e.g., truncation of regulatory or coding regions), it is not possible to infer whether increased off-target cRAG activity really directly contributed to the increased aggressiveness of leukemia.

4. Fig. 6A, it seems that it is really the first four nucleotide (CACA) that determines fRAG binding and the first three (CAC) that determine cRAG binding, as opposed to five for fRAG and four for cRAG, as the author wrote (page 24, lines 493-497).

5. Fig S3B, I don't really see why "significant variations in NHEJ" would necessarily equate "aberrant expression of DNA repair pathways in cRAG leukemic cells". This is purely speculative. Since it has been reported previously that alt-EJ/MMEJ can join off target RAG breaks, do the authors detect high levels of microhomology usage at break points in cRAG tumors?

6. Fig. S7, CDKN2B inhibits CDK4/6 activation by cyclin D, but I don't think it has been shown to regulate CDK6 mRNA expression. The increase in CDK6 mRNA likely just reflects a more proliferative tumor but may have nothing to do with CDKN2B deletion in cRAG1 tumors.

Insufficient details in some figures. For instance, Fig. 1A, please include statistics in the plot showing a comparison of fRAG vs cRAG1, fRAG vs cRAG2, cRAG1 vs cRAG2. As of now, there's a single p-value (0.0425) stated in the main text and the legend but why is there only one p-value when fRAG is compared to cRAG1 or cRAG2? Similarly, the authors wrote "median survival days 11-26, 10-16, 11-21 days, P < 0.0023-0.0299, Fig. S2B." However, it is difficult for me to figure out what are the numbers referring to. For instance, is 11-26 referring to median survival of fRAG inoculated with three different concentrations of GFP+ leukemic cells or is 11-26 referring to median survival of fRAG, cRAG1, cRAG2 inoculated with 10^5 cells? It would be much clearer if the authors can provide the numbers for each pair-wise comparison, if not in the main text, then at least in the figure legend. In Fig. 5A-B, do the plots depict SVs in cRAG tumors or both cRAG and fRAG cells? Also in Fig. 5, why did 24 SVs give rise to 42 breakpoints, and not 48? Doesn't it take 2 breaks to accomplish rearrangement? In Fig. 6B-C, it is not clear how the recombination sizes were calculated. In the examples shown in Fig. 4, only cRAG1 tumors show intra-chromosomal joins (chr 12), while fRAG and cRAG2 tumors show exclusively inter-chromosomal joins.

Insufficient details on certain reagents/methods. For instance, are the cRAG1/2 mice of the same genetic background as fRAG mice (C57BL/6 WT)? On Page 23, line 481, what is a cancer gene? How are they defined? In Fig. 3C, are the FACS plots gated on intact cells? Since apoptotic cells show high levels of gH2AX, I'm surprised that the fraction of gH2AX+ cells is so much lower in fRAG tumors compared to cRAG tumors. The in vitro VDJ assay shown in Fig 3B is not described in the Method section (although it is described in Fig S5b). Fig. 5A-B, do the plots depict SVs in cRAG tumors or both cRAG and fRAG cells?

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary: In the manuscript, the authors summarized and introduced the correlation between the non-core regions of RAG1 and RAG2 in BCR-ABL1+acute B lymphoblastic leukemia and off-target recombination which has certain innovative and clinical significance.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary of Author's Objectives:

The authors aimed to explore JMJD6's role in MYC-driven neuroblastoma, particularly in the interplay between pre-mRNA splicing and cancer metabolism, and to investigate the potential for targeting this pathway.

Strengths:

1. The study employs a diverse range of experimental techniques, including molecular biology assays, next-generation sequencing, interactome profiling, and metabolic analysis. Moreover, the authors specifically focused on gained chromosome 17q in neuroblastoma, in combination with analyzing cancer dependency genes screened with Crispr/Cas9 library, analyzing the association of gene expression with prognosis of neuroblastoma patients with large clinical cohort. This comprehensive approach strengthens the credibility of the findings. The identification of the link between JMJD6-mediated pre-mRNA splicing and metabolic reprogramming in MYC-driven cancer cells is innovative.

2. The authors effectively integrate data from multiple sources, such as gene expression analysis, RNA splicing analysis, JMJD6 interactome assay, and metabolic profiling. This holistic approach provides a more complete understanding of JMJD6's role.

3. The identification of JMJD6 as a potential therapeutic target and its correlation with the response to indisulam have significant clinical implications, addressing an unmet need in cancer treatment.

Weaknesses:

1. The manuscript contains complex technical details and terminology that may pose challenges for readers without a deep background in molecular biology and cancer research. Providing simplified explanations or additional context would enhance accessibility.

2. It would be beneficial to explore whether treatment with JMJD6 inhibitors, both in vitro and in vivo, can effectively target the enhanced pre-mRNA splicing of metabolic genes in MYC-driven cancer cells.

Appraisal of Achievement and Conclusion Support:

The authors have effectively met their objectives by offering valuable insights into JMJD6's role in MYC-driven neuroblastoma. The results robustly underpin their conclusions about JMJD6's contribution to metabolic reprogramming through alternative splicing and its connection to the therapeutic response to indisulam.

Likely Impact on the Field and Utility of Methods/Data:

The study's findings have the potential to significantly impact the field of cancer research by identifying JMJD6 as a promising therapeutic target for MYC-driven cancers. The methods and data presented in the manuscript offer valuable resources to the research community for further investigations into cancer metabolism and splicing regulation.

Additional Context for Interpretation:

Understanding the complex interplay between cancer metabolism and splicing regulation is crucial for developing effective cancer treatments. This study sheds light on a previously poorly understood aspect of MYC-driven cancers and opens new avenues for targeted therapies. However, the transition from preclinical findings to clinical applications may face challenges, which should be considered in future research and clinical trials.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

Jablonowski and colleagues studied key characteristics of MYC-driven cancers: dysregulated pre-mRNA splicing and altered metabolism. This is an important field of study as it remains largely unclear as to how these processes are coordinated in response to malignant transformation and how they are exploitable for future treatments. In the present study, the authors attempt to show that Jumonji Domain Containing 6, Arginine Demethylase And Lysine Hydroxylase (JMJD6) plays a central role in connecting pre-mRNA splicing and metabolism in MYC-driven neuroblastoma. JMJD6 collaborates with the MYC protein in driving cellular transformation by physically interacting with RNA-binding proteins involved in pre-mRNA splicing and protein regulation. In cell line experiments, JMJD6 affected the alternative splicing of two forms of glutaminase (GLS), an essential enzyme in the glutaminolysis process within the central carbon metabolism of neuroblastoma cells. Additionally, the study provides in vitro (and in silico) evidence for JMJD6 being associated with the anti-proliferation effects of a compound called indisulam, which degrades the splicing factor RBM39, known to interact with JMJD6.

Overall, the findings presented by Jabolonowski et al. begin to illuminate a cancer-promoting metabolic, and potentially, a protein synthesis suppression program that may be linked to alternative pre-mRNA splicing through the action of JMJD6 - downstream of MYC. This discovery can provide further evidence for considering JMJD6 as a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of MYC-driven cancers.

Strengths:

Alternative Splicing Induced by JMJD6 Knockdown: the study presents evidence for the role of JMJD6 in alternative splicing in neuroblastoma cells. Specifically, the RNA immunoprecipitation experiments demonstrated a significant shift from the GAC to the KGA GLS isoform upon JMJD6 knockdown. Moreover, a significant correlation between JMJD6 levels and GAC/KGA isoform expression was identified in two distinct neuroblastoma cohorts. This suggests a causative link between JMJD6 activity and isoform prevalence.

Physical Interaction of JMJD6 in Neuroblastoma Cells: The paper provides preliminary insight into the physical interactome of JMJD6 in neuroblastoma cells. This offers a potential mechanistic avenue for the observed effects on metabolism and protein synthesis and could be exploited for a deeper investigation into the exact nature, and implications of neuroblastoma-specific JMJD6 protein-protein interactions.

Weaknesses:

There are several areas that would benefit from improvements with regard to the current data supporting the claims of the paper (i.e., the conclusion presented in Figure 8).

Neuroblastoma Modelling Strategy: The study heavily relies on cell lines without incorporating patient-derived cells/biomaterials. Using databases to fill gaps in the experimental design can only fortify the observations to a certain extent. A critical oversight is the absence of non-cancerous control cells in many figures, and the rationale for selecting specific cell lines for assays/approaches remains somewhat unclear. A foundational control for such experiments should involve the non-transformed neural crest cell line, which the authors have readily available. Are the observed splicing and metabolic effects of JMJD6 specific to neuroblastoma? Is there a neuroblastoma-specific JMJD6 interactome? Is MYC function essential?

In Vivo Modelling: The inclusion of a genetic mouse model combined with an inducible JMJD6 knockdown, would enhance the study by allowing examination of JMJD6's role during both tumor initiation and growth in vivo. For instance, the TH-MYCN mice overexpressing MYCN in neural crest cells, could be a promising choice.

Dependence on Colony Formation Assay: The study leans on 2D and semi-quantitative colony formation assays to assess malignant growth. To validate the link between the mechanistic insights discussed (e.g., reduced protein synthesis) and JMJD6-mediated malignant growth as a potential therapeutic target, evidence from in vivo or representative 3D models would be crucial.

Data Presentation and Rigor: The presented data is predominantly qualitative and necessitates quantification. For instance, Western blots should be quantified. The RNAseq, metabolism, and pull-down data should be transparently and numerically presented. The figure legends seem elusive and their lack of transparency (often with regards to biological repeats, error bars, cell line used etc.) is concerning. Adequate citation and identification of all data sources, including online resources, are imperative. The manuscript would also benefit from a more rigorous depiction and quantification of RNA interference of both stable and transient knockdowns with quantitative validation at mRNA and protein levels.

Novelty Concerns: The emphasis on JMJD6 as a novel neuroblastoma target is contingent on the new mechanistic revelations about the JMJD6-centered link between splicing, metabolism, and protein synthesis. Given that JMJD6 has been previously linked to neuroblastoma biology, the rationale (particularly in Figure 1) for concentrating on JMJD6 may stem more from bias rather than data-driven reasoning.

Depth of Mechanistic Investigation: Current evidence lacks depth in key areas such as JMJD6-RNA binding. A more thorough approach would involve pinpointing specific JMJD6 binding sites on endogenous RNAs using techniques such as cross-linking and immunoprecipitation, paired with complementary proximity-based methodologies. Regarding the presented metabolism data, diving deeper into metabolic flux via isotope labeling experiments could shed light on dynamic processes like TCA and glutaminolysis. As it stands, the 'pathway cartoon' in Figure 6d appears overly qualitative.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Assessment:

The manuscript titled 'Rab7 dependent regulation of goblet cell protein CLCA1 modulates gastrointestinal 1 homeostasis' by Gaur et al discusses the role of Rab7 in the development of ulcerative colitis by regulating the lysosomal degradation of Clca1, a mucin protease. The manuscript presents interesting data and provides a potential molecular mechanism for the pathological alterations observed in ulcerative colitis. Gaur et al demonstrate that Rab7 levels are lowered in UC and CD. However, a similar analysis of Rab7 levels in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) patient samples was conducted recently (Du et al, Dev Cell, 2020) which showed that Rab7 levels are found to be elevated under these conditions. While Gaur et al have briefly mentioned Du et al's paper in passing in the discussion, they need to discuss these contradictory results in their paper and clarify these differences. Additionally, Du et al are not included in the list of references.

Strengths:

The manuscript used a multi-pronged approach and compares patient samples, mouse models of DSS, and protocols that allow differentiation of goblet cells. They also use a nanogel-based delivery system for siRNAs, which is ideal for the knockdown of specific genes in the gut.

Weaknesses:

Du et al, Dev Cell 2020 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2020.03.002) have previously shown that Rab7 levels are elevated in a similar set of colonic samples (age group, number etc) from UC and CD patients. Gaur et al have not discussed this paper or its findings in detail, which directly contradicts their results. Clarification regarding this should be provided.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

In this work, the authors report a role for the well-studied GTPase Rab7 in gut homeostasis. The study combines cell culture experiments with mouse models and human ulcerative colitis patient tissues to propose a model where, Rab7 by delivering a key mucous component CLCA1 to lysosomes, regulates its secretion in the goblet cells. This is important for the maintenance of mucous permeability and gut microbiota composition. In the absence of Rab7, CLCA1 protein levels are higher in tissues as well as the mucus layer, corroborating with the anti-correlation of Rab7 (reduced) and CLCA1 (increased) from ulcerative colitis patients. The authors conclude that Rab7 maintains CLCA1 level by controlling its lysosomal degradation, thereby playing a vital role in mucous composition, colon integrity, and gut homeostasis.

Strengths:

The biggest strength of this manuscript is the combination of cell culture, mouse model, and human tissues. The experiments are largely well done and in most cases, the results support their conclusions. The authors go to substantial lengths to find a link, such as alteration in microbiota, or mucus proteomics.

Weaknesses:

There are also some weaknesses that need to be addressed. The association of Rab7 with UC in both mice and humans is clear, however, claims on the underlying mechanisms are less clear. Does Rab7 regulate specifically CLCA1 delivery to lysosomes, or is it an outcome of a generic trafficking defect? CLCA1 is a secretory protein, how does it get routed to lysosomes, i.e. through Golgi-derived vesicles, or by endocytosis of mucous components? Mechanistic details on how CLCA1 is routed to lysosomes will add substantial value.

Why does the level of Rab7 fluctuate during DSS treatment (Fig 1B)? Does the reduction seen in Rab7 levels (by WB) also reflect in reduced Rab7 endosome numbers? Are other late endosomal (and lysosomal) populations also reduced upon DSS treatment and UC? Is there a general defect in lysosomal function?

The evidence for lysosomal delivery of CLCA1 (Fig 7 I, J) is weak. Although used sometimes in combination with antibodies, lysotracker red is not well compatible with permeabilization and immunofluorescence staining. The authors can substantiate this result further using lysosomal antibodies such as Lamp1 and Lamp2. For Fig 7J, it will be good to see a reduction in Rab7 levels upon KD in the same cell. In this connection, Fig S3D is somewhat confusing. While it is clear that the pattern of Muc2 in WT and Rab7-/- cells are different, how this corroborates with the in vivo data on alterations in mucus layer permeability -- as claimed -- is not clear.

Overall, the work shows a role for a well-studied GTPase, Rab7, in gut homeostasis. This is an important finding and could provide scope and testable hypotheses for future studies aimed at understanding in detail the mechanisms involved.

Joint Public Review:

Summary:

This is an interesting study with high quality imaging and quantitative data. The authors devise a robust quantitative parameter that is easy applicable to any experimental system. The drug screen data can potentially be helpful to the wider community studying nucleolar architecture and effects of chemotherapy drugs. Additionally, the authors find Treacle phosphorylation as a potential link between CDK9 inhibition, rDNA transcription and nucleolar stress. Therefore I think this would be of broad interest to researchers studying transcription, CDKs, nucleolus and chemotherapy drug mechanisms.

Revised manuscript:

While most of my concerns related were addressed, a PolI ChIP on rDNA would be an important experiment to establish the relevance of some of the conclusions of the paper using well established protocols with validated antibodies for PolI ChIP. Furthermore, additional S to A mutants of Treacle S1299A/S1301A is an important control which could have provided evidence if indeed S1299/S1301 were the only sites being phosphorylated by CDK9. To support their model, the authors should test if overexpression of Treacle mutants S1299A/S1301A can partially phenocopy the nucleolar stress seen upon CDK9 inhibition. This would considerably strengthen the author's claim that reduced Treacle phosphorylation leads to Pol I disassociation from rDNA and consequently leads to nucleolar stress. If not, it would have strengthened the authors' argument that Treacle could have multiple sites targeted by CDK9 and that mutating any one or two may not be sufficient to cause disassociation from PolI.

Overall, I believe the primary conclusions regarding the impact of various chemotherapy drugs on nucleolar state are solid and valuable to the broader scientific community. However, the mechanistic exploration of CDK9i is not sufficiently developed, and the authors have not adequately addressed the feedback provided in the original manuscript.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The manuscript by Muthana et al. describes the effect of injection of an antibody specific for human CTLA4 conjugated to a cytotoxic molecule (Ipi-DM1) in knock-in mice expressing human CTLA4. The authors show that Ipi-DM1 administration causes a partial decrease (about 50% in absolute number) of mature B cells in blood and bone marrow 9-14 days after the beginning of treatment. B cell progenitors and pre-B cells in the BM are not affected. Ipi-DM1 also results in a partial decrease in Foxp3+ Tregs (about 40% in absolute number) and a slight increase in activation of conventional T cells (Tconvs) in the blood, spleen, BM and LNs at D9 as well as increased plasma immunoglobulins especially IgE. Tconv depletion, CTLA4-Ig or anti-TNF mAb partially prevents the effect of ipi-DM1 on B cells. This effect of Ipi-DM1 on the reduction B cells and Tregs at D9 is not observed in the spleen and lymph nodes (maybe not the good timing to see it), and there is even an increase in the number of Treg and the frequency and number of B cells in lymph nodes. This work is interesting but has the following major limitations:

1- This work could have been of more interest if the Ipi-DM1 molecule would be used in the clinic. As this is not the case, the intimate mechanism of the effect of this molecule in mice is of reduced interest.

2- The fact that a partial deletion of Tregs is associated with activation of Tconvs and a decrease in B cells is not new. According to the authors, their work would be the first to show that activation of Tconvs would lead to B cell death. However, this is shown in an indirect way and the mechanisms are not really elucidated. The experiments to try to show a causal link are of 2 types: deletion of T cells (Fig 5) and blocking T cell activation with CTLA4-Ig (Fig 6). These 2 experiments are not fully convincing. The absence of B cell depletion in the blood when T cells are deleted can be explained by other mechanisms, such as B cell recirculation to lymphoid tissues or an effect of massive T cell death for example. The experiment with CTLA4-Ig is more convincing because the effect is targeted to activated T cells only. However, the prevention of B cell ablation is only partial. Since only blood is analyzed, other mechanisms could explain the B cell loss, such as their recirculation in lymphoid tissues.

3- The authors propose that the drop in B cell numbers in the blood in mice treated with Ipi-DM1 results from reduced mature B cells in the bone marrow. However, B cells are continuously recirculating between the blood and secondary lymphoid tissues. The drop of blood B cells could be well explained by an increased recirculation to lymphoid organs. The increased numbers of B cells in lymph nodes support this latter hypothesis.

4- The new Figure 2 suggests direct evidence of apoptosis of mature B cells in the BM of treated mice using a PI/annexin V staining assay. This is an important point to support the point of the manuscript. However, using the same assay, the level of B cell apoptosis is of 80% in lymph nodes and 50% in the spleen in control mice (see new Figure 2-figure supplement 1), which is way too high and questions the reliability of this assay. It is likely that B cells enter apoptosis only in vitro due to some artefactual stress.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Despite the fact that CTLA-4 is a critical molecule for inhibiting the immune response, surprisingly individuals with heterozygous CTLA-4 mutations exhibit immunodeficiency, presenting with antibody deficiency secondary to B cell loss. Why the loss of a molecule that regulates T cell activation should lead to B cell loss has remained unclear. In this study, Muthana and colleagues use an anti-CTLA-4 antibody drug conjugate (aCTLA-4 ADC) to delete cells expressing high levels of CTLA-4, and show that this leads to a reduction in B cells. The aCTLA-4 ADC is found to delete a subset of Tregs, leading to hyperactivation of T cells that is associated with B cell depletion. Using blocking antibodies, the authors implicate TNFa in the observed B cell loss.

The reciprocal regulation of T and B cell homeostasis is an important research area. While it has been shown that Treg defects are associated with B cell loss, the mechanisms at play are incompletely understood. CTLA-4 is not normally expressed in B cells so an indirect mechanism of action is assumed. The authors show that the decrease in Treg following aCTLA-4 ADC treatment is associated with activation of T cells, and that B cell loss is blunted if T cells are depleted. A role for both CD4 and CD8 T cells is identified by selective CD4/CD8 depletion. T cells appear to require CD28 costimulation in order to mediate B cell loss, since the response is partially inhibited in the presence of the costimulation blockade drug belatacept (CTLA-4-Ig). Finally, experiments using the anti-TNFa antibody adalimumab suggest a potential role for TNFa in the depletion of B cells.

While the manuscript makes a useful contribution, a number of limitations remain. Perhaps most important is the extent to which this model mimics the natural situation in individuals with CTLA-4 mutations (or following CTLA-4-based clinical interventions). aCTLA-4 ADC treatment permits acute deletion of Treg expressing high levels of CTLA-4, whereas in patients the Treg population remains but is specifically impaired in CTLA-4 function. Secondly, although the requirement for T cells to mediate B cell loss is convincingly demonstrated, the incomplete reversal by TNFa blockade suggests additional unidentified factors contribute to this effect. Finally, although the manuscript favours peripheral killing of mature B cells over alterations to B cell lymphopoiesis, one concern is that this may simply reflect the model employed: the short-term (6 day) treatment used here may be too acute to alter B cell development, but this may nevertheless be a feature of prolonged immune dysregulation in humans.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The co-suppressive molecule CTLA-4 has a critical role in the maintenance of peripheral tolerance, primarily by Treg mediated control of the co-stimulatory molecules CD80 and CD86. As stated by the authors, previous studies have found a variety of effects of anti-CTLA-4 antibody treatment or genetic loss of CTLA-4 on B-cells. These include increased B-cell activation and antibody production, autoantibody production, impairment of B-cell production in the bone marrow and loss of peripheral B-cells. In this article Muthana et al use a CTLA-4 humanized mouse model and examine the effects of drug conjugated CTLA-4 on the immune system. They observe a transient loss of B-cells in the blood of the treated mice. They then use a range of immune interventions such as T-cell depletion and blocking antibodies to demonstrate that this effect is dependent on T-cell activation.

Since anti-CTLA-4 immunotherapy is in active clinical use exploration of its effects are welcome, this is helped by the use of a humanized CTLA-4 system which should be considered a strength of the paper. However, currently the central premise of this paper, that B-cells are depleted seems underexplored. Direct evidence of T-cell killing of B-cells is never presented, rather it is inferred from the reduced numbers of B-cells in the blood and increased apoptosis in the bone marrow. It is not made clear if B-cell numbers in the bone marrow are reduced.

Upon examining lymphoid organs it seems that the spleen is relatively unchanged while the lymph nodes have a large increase in B-cells alongside increased serum antibody levels. The paper does underline the importance of looking at the differences of multiple immune compartments and interesting phenomenon are described in each compartment. Simultaneous inhibition of B-cell lymphopoiesis and blood trafficking with strong activation and antibody production of lymphoid resident (presumably germinal center) B-cells appears to be occurring. However the current overall interpretation that B-cells are broadly depleted is perhaps too simplistic and largely ignores the lymphoid organs and serum antibodies.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This study introduces an innovative method for assessing the mean kurtosis, utilizing the mathematical foundation of the sub-diffusion framework. In particular, a new fitting technique that incorporates two different diffusion times is proposed to estimate the parameters of the sub-diffusion model. The evaluation of this technique, which generates kurtosis maps based on the sub-diffusion framework, is conducted through simulations and the examination of data obtained from human subjects.

Strengths:<br /> The utilization of the sub-diffusion model for tissue characterization is a significant conceptual advancement for the field of diffusion MRI. This study adeptly harnesses this approach for an accurate estimation of the parameters of the widely employed diffusion model, DKI, leveraging their established analytical interconnection as evidenced in prior research. Notably, this approach not only proposes a robust, fast, and accurate technique for DKI parameter estimation but also underscores the viability of deploying the sub-diffusion model for tissue characterization, substantiated by both simulated and human subject analyses. The paper is very-well written; well-organized; and coherent. The simulation study included different aspects of water diffusion as captured by diffusion-weighted MRI such as varying diffusion times and different b-value subpopulations, resulting in a comprehensive and thorough discussion.

Weaknesses:<br /> The primary objective of this study is to demonstrate a robust approach for estimating DKI parameters by directly calculating them using the parameters of the sub-diffusion model. This premise, however, relies on the assumption that the sub-diffusion model effectively characterizes the diffusion MRI signal and that its parameters are both robust and accurate. Throughout the manuscript, the term "ground truth kurtosis K" is frequently used to denote the "true K" value in the context of the simulation study. Nonetheless, given that the data is simulated using the new sub-diffusion model - an approximation of the DKI-based signal expression- this value cannot truly be considered the "ground truth K". The simulation study highlights the robustness and accuracy of D* and K*, but it inherently operates under the assumption that the observed data is in the form of the sub-diffusion model.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary: The authors present a technique for fitting diffusion magnetic resonance images (dMRI) to a sub-diffusion model of the diffusion process within brain imaging. The authors suggest that their technique provides robust and accurate calculation of diffusional kurtosis imaging parameters from which high quality images can be calculated from short dMRI data acquisitions at two diffusion times.

Strengths: If the authors can show that the dMRI signal in brain tissue follows a sub-diffusion model decay curve then their technique for accurately and robustly calculating diffusional kurtosis parameters from multiple diffusion times would be of benefit for tissue microstructural imaging in research and clinical arenas.

Weaknesses: The applied sub-diffusion model has two parameters that are invariant to diffusion time, D_β and β which are used to calculate the diffusional kurtosis measures of a diffusion time dependent D* and a diffusion time invariant K*. However, the authors do not demonstrate that the D_β, β and K* parameters are invariant to diffusion time in brain tissue. The authors' results visually show that there is time dependence of the K* measure (in Figure 6) that is more apparent in white matter with K* values being higher for diffusion times of ∆=49 ms than ∆ = 19 ms. The diffusion time dependence of K* indicates there is also diffusion time dependence of β. Furthermore, Figure 7 shows that there is a tissue specific root mean squared error in model fitting over the two diffusion times which indicates greater deviation from the model fit in white matter than grey matter. To show that the sub-diffusion model is robust and accurate (and consequently that K* is robust and accurate) the authors would have to demonstrate that there is no diffusion time-dependence in both D_β and β in application to brain imaging data for each diffusion time separately. Simulated data should not be used to demonstrate the robustness and accuracy of the sub-diffusion model or to determine optimization of dMRI acquisition parameters without first demonstrating that D_β and β are invariant to diffusion time. This is because simulated signals calculated by using the sub-diffusion charateristic equation of dMRI signal decay will necessarily have diffusion time invariant D_β and β parameters.

Without further information demonstrating diffusion time invariance of D_β, β and K* it is not possible to determine whether the authors have achieved their aims or that their results support their conclusions.

Joint Public Review:

The manuscript presents compelling evidence for the role of the zona incerta area of the brain in regulating movement and sensory stimuli in mice. The study uses appropriate and validated methodology in line with the current state-of-the-art, including optogenetic manipulation and recording of single-unit activity. The authors' claims and conclusions are well-supported by their data, which includes a comprehensive review of previous research on the zona incerta. Overall, the manuscript provides solid evidence for the role of the zona incerta in regulating movement and sensory processing.

Major strengths and weaknesses of the methods and results.<br /> The zona incerta have many integrative functions that link sensory stimuli with motor responses to guide behavior.<br /> The study explored the activation of zona incerta GABAergic neurons during cued avoidance tasks and found that these neurons activate during goal-directed avoidance movement. Optogenetic manipulation of these neurons affected movement speed and performance during active avoidance tasks.<br /> The findings suggest that the zona incerta area of the brain plays a significant role in regulating movement and responding to salient auditory tones in association with movement in mice. The evidence presented is fundamental and provides a comprehensive review of previous research on the zona incerta and its involvement in various behaviors and sensory processing.

The article is very well written, with a correct hypothesis and a cutting-edge methodology to achieve the expected objectives. Moreover, they use statistical rigorous approaches in the analysis of the results. Also, analyzes are performed using scripts that automate all aspects of data analysis, ensuring their objectivity. The results are very novel, and provides solid evidence for the role of the zona incerta in regulating movement and sensory processing.

Joint Public Review:

In the current paper, Jones et al. describe a new framework, named "coccinella", for real-time high-throughput behavioral analysis aimed at reducing the cost of analyzing behavior. In the setup used here each fly is confined to a small circular arena and able to walk around on an agar bed spiked with nutrients or pharmacological agents. The new framework, built on the researchers' previously developed platform Ethoscope, relies on relatively low-cost Raspberry Pi video cameras to acquire images at ~0.5 Hz and pull out, in real time, the maximal velocity (parameter extraction) during 10 second windows from each video. Thus, the program produces a text file, and not voluminous videos requiring storage facilities for large amounts of video data, a prohibitive step in many behavioral analyses. The maximal velocity time-series is then fed to an algorithm called Highly Comparative Time-Series Classification (HCTSA)(which itself is based on a large number of feature extraction algorithms) developed by other researchers. HCTSA identifies statistically salient features in the time-series which are then passed on to a type of linear classifier algorithm called support vector machines (SVM). In cases where such analyses are sufficient for characterizing the behaviors of interest this system performs as well as other state-of-the-art systems used in behavioral analysis (e.g., DeepLabCut)

In a pharmacobehavior paradigm testing different chemicals, the authors show that coccinella can identify specific compounds as effectively as other more time-consuming and resource-consuming systems.

The new paradigm should be of interest to researchers involved in drug screens, and more generally, in high-throughput analysis focused on gross locomotor defects in fruit flies such as identification of sleep phenotypes. By extracting/saving only the maximal velocity from video clips, the method is fast. However, the rapidity of the platform comes at a cost--loss of information on subtle but important behavioral alterations. When seeking subtle modifications in animal behavior, solutions like DeepLabCut, which are admittedly slower but far superior in terms of the level of details they yield, would be more appropriate.

The manuscript reads well, and it is scientifically solid. The comments listed below were directed to the original submission and were satisfactorily addressed in the revised version.

1- The fact that Coccinella runs on Ethoscopes, an open source hardware platform described by the same group, is very useful because the relevant publication describes Ethoscope in detail. However, the current version of the paper does not offer details or alternatives for users that would like to test the framework, but do not have an Ethoscope. Would it be possible to overcome this barrier and have coccinella run with any video data (and, thus, potentially be used to analyze data obtained from other animal models)?

2- Readers who want background on the analytical approaches that the platform relies on following maximal velocity extraction, will have to consult the original publications. In particular, the current manuscript does not provide much explanation on Highly Comparative Time-Series Classification (HCTSA) or SVM; this may be reasonable because the methods were developed earlier by others. While some readers may find that the lack of details increases the manuscript's readability, others may be left wanting to see more discussion on these not-so-trivial approaches. In addition, it is worth noting that the same authors that published the HCTSA method, also described a shorter version named catch22, that runs faster with a similar output. Thus, explaining in more detail how HCTSA operates, considering is a relatively new method, will make the method more convincing.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

This manuscript explores the multiple cell types present in the wall of murine-collecting lymphatic vessels with the goal of identifying cells that initiate the autonomous action potentials and contractions needed to drive lymphatic pumping. Through the use of genetic models to delete individual genes or detect cytosolic calcium in specific cell types, the authors convincingly determine that lymphatic muscle cells are the origin of the action potential that triggers lymphatic contraction.

Strengths:

The experiments are rigorously performed, the data justify the conclusions, and the limitations of the study are appropriately discussed.

There is a need to identify therapeutic targets to improve lymphatic contraction and this work helps identify lymphatic muscle cells as potential cellular targets for intervention.

Weaknesses:

My only major comment would be that the manuscript provides a lot of rich information describing the cellular components of the muscular lymphatic vessel wall and that these data are not well represented by the title. The title (while currently accurate) could be tweaked to better represent all that is in this manuscript. Maybe something like "Characterization/Interrogation of the cellular components of murine collecting lymphatic vessels reveals that lymphatic muscle cells are the innate pacemaker cells regulating lymphatic contractions" or "Discovery/Confirmation of lymphatic muscle cells as innate pacemaker cells of lymphatic contraction through characterization of the cellular components of murine collecting lymphatic vessels". Potentially a cartoon summary figure of the components that make up the collecting lymphatic vessel wall could also be included. In my opinion, these changes will make this manuscript of more interest to a broader group of scientists. I have a few additional comments for consideration to improve the clarity and enhance the discussion of this work.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

This is a well-written manuscript describing studies directed at identifying the cell type responsible for pacemaking in murine-collecting lymphatics. Using state-of-the-art approaches, the authors identified a number of different cell types in the wall of these lymphatics and then using targeted expression of Channel Rhodopsin and GCaMP, the authors convincingly demonstrate that only activation of lymphatic muscle cells produces coordinated lymphatic contraction and that only lymphatic muscle cells display pressure-dependent Ca2+ transients as would be expected of a pacemaker in these lymphatics.

Strengths:

The use of a targeted expression of channel rhodopsin and GCaMP to test the hypothesis that lymphatic muscle cells serve as the pacemakers in musing lymphatic collecting vessels.

Weaknesses:

The only significant weakness was the lack of quantitative analysis of most of the imaging data shown in Figures 1-11. In particular, the colonization analysis should be extended to show cells not expected to demonstrate colocalization as a negative control for the colocalization analysis that the authors present.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:

Zawieja et al. aimed to identify the pacemaker cells in the lymphatic collecting vessels. Authors have used various Cre-based expression systems and optogentic tools to identify these cells. Their findings suggest these cells are lymphatic muscle cells that drive the pacemaker activity in the lymphatic collecting vessels.

Strengths:

The authors have used multiple approaches to test their hypothesis. Some findings are presented as qualitative images, while some quantitative measurements are provided.

Weaknesses:

- More quantitative measurements.<br /> - Possible mechanisms associated with the pacemaker activity.<br /> - Membrane potential measurements.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The evolution of dioecy in angiosperms has significant implications for plant reproductive efficiency, adaptation, evolutionary potential, and resilience to environmental changes. Dioecy allows for the specialization and division of labor between male and female plants, where each sex can focus on specific aspects of reproduction and allocate resources accordingly. This division of labor creates an opportunity for sexual selection to act and can drive the evolution of sexual dimorphism.

In the present study, the authors investigate sex-biased gene expression patterns in juvenile and mature dioecious flowers to gain insights into the molecular basis of sexual dimorphism. They find that a large proportion of the plant transcriptome is differentially regulated between males and females with the number of sex-biased genes in floral buds being approximately 15 times higher than in mature flowers. The functional analysis of sex-biased genes reveals that chemical defense pathways against herbivores are up-regulated in the female buds along with genes involved in the acquisition of resources such as carbon for fruit and seed production, whereas male buds are enriched in genes related to signaling, inflorescence development and senescence of male flowers. Furthermore, the authors implement sophisticated maximum likelihood methods to understand the forces driving the evolution of sex-biased genes. They highlight the influence of positive and relaxed purifying selection on the evolution of male-biased genes, which show significantly higher rates of non-synonymous to synonymous substitutions than female or unbiased genes. This is the first report (to my knowledge) highlighting the occurrence of this pattern in plants. Overall, this study provides important insights into the genetic basis of sexual dimorphism and the evolution of reproductive genes in Cucurbitaceae.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

This study uses transcriptome sequence from a dioecious plant to compare evolutionary rates between genes with male- and female-biased expression and distinguish between relaxed selection and positive selection as causes for more rapid evolution. These questions have been explored in animals and algae, but few studies have investigated this in dioecious angiosperms, and none have so far identified faster rates of evolution in male-biased genes (though see Hough et al. 2014 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319227111).

Strengths:

The methods are appropriate to the questions asked. Both the sample size and the depth of sequencing are sufficient, and the methods used to estimate evolutionary rates and the strength of selection are appropriate. The data presented are consistent with faster evolution of genes with male-biased expression, due to both positive and relaxed selection.

This is a useful contribution to understanding the effect of sex-biased expression in genetic evolution in plants. It demonstrates the range of variation in evolutionary rates and selective mechanisms, and provides further context to connect these patterns to potential explanatory factors in plant diversity such as the age of sex chromosomes and the developmental trajectories of male and female flowers.

Weaknesses:

The presence of sex chromosomes is a potential confounding factor, since there are different evolutionary expectations for X-linked, Y-linked, and autosomal genes. Attempting to distinguish transcripts on the sex chromosomes from autosomal transcripts could provide additional insight into the relative contributions of positive and relaxed selection.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

The potential for sexual selection and the extent of sexual dimorphism in gene expression have been studied in great detail in animals, but hardly examined in plants so far. In this context, the study by Zhao, Zhou et al. al represents a welcome addition to the literature.

Relative to the previous studies in Angiosperms, the dataset is interesting in that it focuses on reproductive rather than somatic tissues (which makes sense to investigate sexual selection), and includes more than a single developmental stage (buds + mature flowers).

Some aspects of the presentation have been improved in this new version of the manuscript. Specifically:

- the link between sex-biased and tissue-biased genes is now slightly clearer,<br /> - the limitation related to the de novo assembled transcriptome is now formally acknowledged,<br /> - the interpretation of functional categories of the genes identified is more precise,<br /> - the legends of supplementary figures have been improved<br /> - a large number of typos have been fixed.

However, overall the analyses are largely unchanged and the manuscript did not mature much in response to this first round of reviews. As I detail below, many of the relevant and constructive suggestions by the previous reviewers were not taken into account in this revision. For instance:

- Reviewer 2 made precise suggestions for trying to take into account the potential confonding factor of sex-chromosomes. This suggestion was not followed.<br /> - Reviewer 1 & 3 indicated that results were mentioned in the discussion section without having been described before. This was not fixed in this new version.<br /> - Reviewer 1 asked for a comparison between the number of de novo assembled unigenes in this transcriptome and the number of genes in other Cucurbitaceae species. I could not see this comparison reported.<br /> - Reviewer 1 pointed out that permutation tests were more appropriate, but no change was made to the manuscript.<br /> - Reviewer 3 pointed out the small sample size (both for the RNA-seq and the phylogenetic analysis), but again this limitation is not acknowledged very clearly.<br /> - Reviewer 1 & 3 pointed out that Fig 3 was hard to understand and asked for clarifications that I did not see in the text and the figure in unchanged.<br /> - Reviewer 3 suggested to combine all genes with sex-bias expression when evaluating the evolutionary rate, in addition to the analyses already done. This suggestion was not followed.<br /> - Reviewer 3 pointed out that hand-picking specific categories of genes was not statistically valid, and in fact not necessary in the present context. This was not changed.<br /> - Reviewer 1 asked for all data to be public, but I could not find in the manuscript where the link to the data on ResearchGate was provided.<br /> - Reviewers 1 & 3 pointed out that since only two tissues were compared, the claims on pleiotropy should have been toned down, but no change was made to the text.<br /> - Reviewer 1 asked for a clarification on which genes are plotted on the heatmap of Fig3C and an explanation of the color scale. No change was made.<br /> - Reviewer 1 asked for panel B in Fig 5 and 6 to be removed. They are still there. They asked for abbreviations to be explained in the legend of Fig S8. This was not done. They asked for details about coluln headers. Such detailed were not added. They asked for more recent references on line 53-56 : this was not done.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This study addresses the fundamental question of how the nucleotide, associated with the beta-subunit of the tubulin dimer, dictates the tubulin-tubulin interaction strength in the microtubule polymer. This problem has been a topic of debate in the field for over a decade, and it is essential for understanding microtubule dynamics.

McCormick and colleagues focus their attention on two hypotheses, which they call the "self-acting" model and the "interface-acting" model. Both models have been previously discussed in the literature and they are related to the specific way, in which the GTP hydrolysis in the beta-tubulin subunit exerts an effect on the microtubule lattice. The authors argue that the two considered models can be discriminated based on a quantitative analysis of the sensitivity of the growth rates at the plus- and minus-ends of microtubules to the concentration of GDP-tubulins in mixed nucleotide (GDP/GMPCPP) experiments. By combing computational simulations and in vitro observations, they conclude that the tubulin-tubulin interaction strength is determined by the interfacial nucleotide.

The major strength of the paper is a systematic and thorough consideration of GDP as a modulator of microtubule dynamics, which brings novel insights about the structure of the stabilizing cap on the growing microtubule end.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

In their manuscript, McCormick, Cleary et al., explore the question of how the nucleotide state of the tubulin heterodimer affects the interaction between adjacent tubulins. They use a solid combination of biochemical reconstitution assays and modeling to reveal that the nucleotide at the interface of two tubulin dimers determines the strength of the interaction between two dimers. Overall, the findings will be valuable to the field of microtubule biology.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

This work challenges previously published results regarding the presence and abundance of 6mA in the Drosophila genome, as well as the claim that the TET or DMAD enzyme serves as the "eraser" of this DNA methylation mark and its roles in development. This information is needed to clarify these questions in the field. I am less familiar with the biochemical approaches in this work, so my comments are mainly on the genetic analyses. Generally speaking, the methods for fly husbandry and treatment seem to be in accordance with those established in the field.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

DNA adenine methylation (6mA) is a rediscovered modification that has been described in a wide range of eukaryotes. However, 6mA presence in eukaryote remains controversial due to the low abundance of its modification in eukaryotic genome. In this manuscript, Boulet et al. re-investigate 6mA presence in drosophila using axenic or conventional fly to avoid contaminants from feeding bacteria. By using these flies, they find that 6mA is rare but present in the drosophila genome by performing LC/MS/MS. They also find that the loss of TET (also known as DMAD) does not impact 6mA levels in drosophila, contrary to previous studies. In addition, the authors find that TET is required for fly development in its enzymatic activity-independent manner.

The strength of this study is, that compared to previous studies of 6mA in drosophila, the authors employed axenic or conventional fly for 6mA analysis. These fly strains make it possible to analyze 6mA presence in drosophila without bacterial contaminant. Therefore, showing data of 6mA abundance in drosophila by performing LC-MS/MS in this manuscript is more convincing as compared with previous studies. Intriguingly, the authors find that the conserved iron-binding motif required for the catalytic activity of TET is dispensable for its function. This finding could be important to reveal TET function in organisms whose genomic 5mC levels are very low.

The manuscript in this paper is well written but some aspects of data analysis and discussion need to be clarified and extended.<br /> 1) It is convincing that an increase in 6mA levels is not observed in TETnull presented in Fig1. But it seems 6mA levels are altered in Ax.TET1/2 compared with Ax.TETwt and Ax.TETnull presented in Fig1f (and also WT vs TET1/2 presented in Fig1g). Is it sure that no statistically significant were not observed between Ax.TET1/2 and Ax.TETwt?<br /> 2) The representing data of in vitro demethylation assay presented in Fig.3 is convincing, but it is not well discussed and analyzed why these results are contrary to previous reports (Yao et al., 2018 and Zhang et al., 2015).

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In this manuscript by DeHaro-Arbona et al., the authors wish to understand how a signaling pathway (Notch) is dynamically decoded to elicit a specific transcriptional output. In particular, they investigate the kinetic properties of Notch-responsive nuclear complexes (the DNA binding factor CSL and its co-activator Mastermind (mam) along with several candidate interacting partners). Their experimental model is the polytene chromosome of the Drosophila salivary gland, in which the naturally inactive Notch can be artificially induced through the expression of a constitutively active form of Notch.

The authors develop a series of CRISPR and transgenic lines enabling the live imaging of these complexes at a specific locus and in various backgrounds (genetic perturbations/drug treatments). This quantitative live imaging data suggests that Notch nuclear complexes form hubs and the authors characterize their binding dynamics. Interestingly, they elegantly demonstrate that the content of these hubs and their kinetic properties can evolve, even within Notch ON cells. Hence, they propose the existence of distinct hubs, distinguishing an open (CSL), engaged (CSK-Mam), or active (CSL-Mam-Med-PolII) configuration in Notch ON cells and an inactive hub (in Notch OFF having previously been exposed to Notch) state, that would explain the surprising transcriptional memory that the authors observe hours after Notch withdrawal.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The manuscript from deHaro-Arbona et al, entitled "Dynamic modes of Notch transcription hubs conferring memory and stochastic activation revealed by live imaging the co-activator Mastermind", uses single molecule microscopy imaging in live tissues to understand the dynamics and molecular determinants of transcription factor recruitment to the E(spl)-C locus in Drosophila salivary gland cells under Notch-ON and -OFF conditions. Previous studies have identified the major players that are involved in transcription regulation in the Notch pathway, as well as the importance of general transcriptional coregulators, such as CBP/P300 and the Mediator CDK module, but the detailed steps and dynamics involved in these processes are poorly defined. The authors present a wealth of single molecule data that provides significant insights into Notch pathway activation, including:

1. Activation complexes, containing CSL and Mam, have slower dynamics than the repressor complexes, containing CSL and Hairless.

2. Contribution of CSL, NICD, and Mam IDRs to recruitment.

3. CSL-Mam slow-diffusing complexes are recruited and form a hub of high protein concentrations around the target locus in Notch-ON conditions.

4. Mam recruitment is not dependent on transcription initiation or RNA production.

5. CBP/P300 or its associated HAT activity is not required for Mam recruitment.

6. Mediator CDK module and CDK8 activity are required for Mam recruitment, and vice-versa, but not CSL recruitment.

7. Mam is not required for chromatin accessibility but is dependent on CSL and NICD.

8. CSL recruitment and increased chromatin accessibility persist after NICD removal and loss of Mam, which confers a memory state that enables rapid re-activation in response to subsequent Notch activation.

9. Differences in the proportions of nuclei with both Pol II and with Mam enrichment, which results in transcription being probabilistic/stochastic. These data demonstrate that the presence of Mam-complexes is not sufficient to drive all the steps required for transcription in every Notch-ON nucleus.

10. The switch from more stochastic to robust transcription initiation was elicited when ecdysone was added.

Overall, the manuscript is well written, concise, and clear, and makes significant contributions to the Notch field, which are also important for a general understanding of transcription factor regulation and behavior in the nucleus. I recommend that the authors address my relatively minor criticisms detailed below.

Page 7, bottom. The authors speculate, "It is possible therefore that, once recruited, Mam can be retained at target loci independently of CSL by interactions with other factors so that it resides for longer." Is it possible that another interpretation of that data is that Mam is a limiting factor?

Page 9. The authors write, "A very low level of enrichment was evident for... for the CSL C-terminus..". The recruitment of CSL ct IDR does not appear to be statistically significant or there is no apparent difference (Figure S2C), suggesting the CSL ct IDR does not play a role in enrichment.

Page 9. The authors write, "Notably, MamnIDR::GFP fusion was present in droplets, suggesting it can self-associate when present in a high local concentration (Figure S2B)." Is this result only valid for Mam nIDR or does full-length Mam also localize into droplets, as has been previously observed for full-length mammalian Maml1 in transfected cells?

Previous studies in mammalian cells suggest that Maml1 is a high-confidence target for phosphorylation by CDK8, see Poss et al 2016 Cell Reports https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.03.030. By sequence comparison, does fly Mam have similar potential phosphorylation sites, and might these be critical for Mam/CDK module recruitment?

Page 11: The authors write, "The differences in the effects on Mam and CSL imply that the CDK module is specifically involved in retaining Mam in the hub, and that in its absence other CSL complexes "win-out", either because the altered conditions favour them and/or because they are the more abundant." Are the "other" complexes the authors are referring to Hairless-containing complexes? With the reagents the authors have in hand couldn't this be explicitly shown for CSL-complexes rather than speculated upon?

Page 12/13: The authors write, "Based on these results we propose that, after Notch activity decays, the locus remains accessible because when Mam-containing complexes are lost they are replaced by other CSL complexes (e.g. co-repressor complexes)." Again, why not actually test this hypothesis rather than speculate? The dynamics of Hairless complexes following the removal of Notch would be very interesting and build upon previously published results from the Bray lab.

Page 13: The authors write, "As Notch removal leads to a loss of Mam, but not CSL, from the hub, it should recapitulate the effects of MamDN." While the data in Figure 5B seem to support this hypothesis, it's not clear to me that the loss of Mam and MamDN should phenocopy each other, bc in the case of MamDN, NICD would still be present.

The temporal dynamics for Mam recruitment using the temperature- and optogenetic-paradigms are quite different. For example, in the optogenetic time course experiments, the preactivated cells are in the dark for 4 hours, while in the temperature-controlled experiments, there is still considerable enrichment of Mam at 4 hours. For the preactivated optogenetic experiments, how sure are the authors that Mam is completely gone from the locus, and alternatively, can the optogenetic experimental results be replicated in the temperature-controlled assays? My concern is whether the putative "memory" observation is just due to incomplete Mam removal from the previous activation event.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> DeHaro-Arbona and colleagues investigate the in vivo dynamics of Notch-dependent transcriptional activation with a focus on the role of the Mastermind (MAM) transcriptional co-activator. They use GFP and HALO-tagged versions of the CSL DNA-binding protein and MAM to visualize the complex, and Int/ParB to visualize the site of Notch-dependent E(Spl)-C transcription. They make several conclusions. First, MAM accumulates at E(Spl)-C when Notch signaling is active, just like CSL. Second, MAM recruits the CDK module of Mediator but does not initiate chromatin accessibility. Third, after signaling is turned off, MAM leaves the site quickly but CSL and chromatin accessibility are retained. Fourth, RNA pol II recruitment, Mediator recruitment, and active transcription were similar and stochastic. Fifth, ecdysone enhances the probability of transcriptional initiation.

Strengths:<br /> The conclusions are well supported by multiple lines of extensive data that are carefully executed and controlled. A major strength is the strategic combination of Drosophila genetics, imaging, and quantitative analyses to conduct compelling and easily interpretable experiments. A second major strength is the focus on MAM to gain insights into the dynamics of transcriptional activation specifically.

Weaknesses:<br /> Weaknesses are minor. There were no p-values reported for data presented in Figure S1D and no indication of how variable measurements were. In addition, the discussion of stochasticity was not integrated optimally with relevant literature.

Joint Public Review:

The revised version of the manuscript "Delayed postglacial colonization of Betula in Iceland and the circum North Atlantic" by Harning et al. investigates the colonization of shrubs during the Late Pleistocene/Holocene in Northern America and Europe by comparing published sedimentary ancient DNA (sedaDNA) records (and pollen data) with a new sedaDNA record from Island. The manuscript aims to identify shrub colonization patterns, discusses their drivers and evaluates the importance of shrubification under future warming.

The revised version improved the clarity of methods and discussion and results presented are more convincing.

However, parts of the methods (e.g. assessment of blanks and data filtering) and results (e.g. visualization of plant community data) could still be polished, and the figures should be improved to increase the clarity of the manuscript.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

This study generated 3D cell constructs from endometrial cell mixtures that were seeded in the Matrigel scaffold. The cell assemblies were treated with hormones to induce a "window of implantation" (WOI) state. Although many bioinformatic analyses point in this direction, there are major concerns that must be addressed.

Strengths:

The addition of 3 hormones to enhance the WOI state (although not clearly supported in comparison to the secretory state).

Weaknesses:

First of all, the term organoid must be discarded. The authors just seed the endometrial cell mixture which assembles and aggregates into a 3D structure which is then immediately used for analysis. Organoids grow from tissue stem cells and must be passage-able (see their own description in lines 69-71). So, the term organoid must be removed everywhere, to not confuse the organoid field. It is not shown that the whole 3D assembly is passageable, which would be very surprising given the fact that immune and stromal cells do not grow in Matrigel because of the unfavorable growing conditions (which are targeted to epithelial cell growth).

Second, the study remains fully descriptive, bombing the reader with a mass of bioinformatic analyses without clear descriptions and take-home messages. The paper is very dense, meaning readers may give up. Moreover, functional validation, except for morphological and immunostaining analyses (which are posed as "functional" but actually are only again expression) is missing, such as in vivo functionality (after transplantation e.g.) and embryo interaction. Importantly, the 3D structure misses the right architecture with a lining luminal epithelium which is present in the receptive endometrium in vivo and needed as the first contact site with the embryo. So, in contrast to what the authors claim, this is not the best model to study embryo interaction, or the closest model to the in vivo state (line 318, line 326).

Third, receptive endometrial organoids (assembloids; Rawlings et al., eLife 2021) and receptive organoid-derived "open-faced endometrial layer" (Kagawa et al., Nature 2022) have already been described, which is in contrast to what the authors claim in several places that "they are the first" (e.g. lines 87-88, 316-319, etc). These studies used real organoids to achieve their model (and even showed embryo interaction), while in the present study, different cell types are just seeded and assembled. Hence, logically, immune cells are present which are never found in real organoid models. The only original aspect in the present study is the use of hormones to enhance the WOI phenotype. However, crucial information on this original aspect is missing such as concentration of the hormones, refreshment schedule, all 3 hormones added together or separately, and all 3 required?

Moreover, it is not a "robust" model at all as the authors claim, given the variability of the initial cell mixture (varying from patient to patient). Actually, the reproducibility is not shown. The proportions of the different cell types seeded in the Matrigel droplet will be different with every endometrial biopsy. It would be much better to recombine epithelial (passageable) organoids with stromal and immune cells in a quantified, standardized manner to establish a "robust" model.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

A wide variety of assays are used to describe the new culture system and compare it both with those previously described and with the endometrial tissue itself. The three different cultures they used are control organoids (CTRL) cultured with described expansion media, secretory organoids (SEC, cultured with E2, MPA and cAMP inducing secretory phase as previously reported) and WOI organoids (cultured with E2, MPA, cAMP, prolactin (PRL), human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and human placental lactogen (hPL)). First, they performed morphological characterization of cultures using different antibodies, showing the presence of epithelial glandular cells and stromal cells, as well as their proliferation and absence of apoptosis. Glycogen secretion and progesterone receptor expression complete organoid characterization at the functional and hormone response levels respectively.

Then, they performed single-cell transcriptomics to analyse its composition in terms of cell type, comparing with different databases, but with an unknown "n". They detect stromal, epithelial, and immune cells (also by microscopy), and analyse gene expression and transcription regulation, showing similarities between WOI organoids and mid-secretory endometrium. With endometrial receptivity analysis, they suggest a successful formation of the implantation window in vitro, but this result is difficult to interpret.

Analyzing transcriptome and proteome information of WOI organoids, authors demonstrate a strong response to estrogen and progesterone, but some comparisons are made with CTRL and SEC, and others only with CTRL, which limits the power of some results. In the same way, some genes related to Cilia and pinopodes appear dominant in WOI organoids, but the comparison by electron microscopy is made only against CTRL organoids.

In subsequent analysis, WOI organoids showed a marked differentiation from proliferative to secretory epithelium, and from proliferative epithelium to EMT-derived stromal cells than SEC organoids. These statements are based on their upregulation of monocarboxylic acid and lipid metabolism, their enhanced peptide metabolism and mitochondrial energy metabolism, or their pseudotime trajectories. However, other analyses (such as the accumulation of secretory epithelium or decreased proliferative epithelium, the increased ciliated epithelium after hormonal treatment, or the presence of EMT-derived stromal cells) show only small differences between SEC and WOI organoids.

In summary, the development of an endometrial organoid culture methodology that allows targeting the endometrial situation in the window of implantation could change the experimental approaches of many studies, but more evidence is needed, and above all, more approaches on how different WOI organoids are from SEC organoids, to be sure if it is worth using them in implantation.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> TRAP transporters are an unusual class of secondary active transporters that utilize periplasmic binding proteins to deliver their substrates. This paper contributes a new 3 Å structure of the Haemophilus influenzae TRAP transporter. The structure joins two other recent cryo-EM structures of TRAP transporters, including a lower-resolution structure of the same H. influenzae protein (overall 4.7 Å), and a ~3 Å structure of a homologue from P. profundum. In addition to reporting a higher resolution cryo-EM structure, the authors also recapitulate protein activity in a reconstituted system, investigate protein oligomerization using analytic ultracentrifugation, and evaluate interactions and function in "mix and match" configurations with periplasmic subunits from other homologues.

Strengths:<br /> The strength of the paper is that the better resolution cryo-EM data permits sidechain assignment, the identification of bound lipids, and the identification of sodium ions. It is important to get this structure out there since the resolution passes an important threshold for model-building accuracy. The current structure nicely explains a lot of prior mutagenesis data on the H. influenzae TRAP. This is also the first structure of a TRAP protein to be solved without a fiducial, although the overall structure is not very different from those solved with fiducials.

Weaknesses:<br /> The experiments examining the monomer/dimer equilibrium appear somewhat preliminary. The biological or mechanistic importance of oligomerization is not established, so these experiments are inherently of limited scope. Moreover, cryo-EM datasets exhibit both parallel and antiparallel dimers, the latter of which are clearly not biologically relevant. It is probably impossible to distinguish these in the AUC experiments, which makes interpretation of these experiments more difficult.

Similarly, the importance of the lipid binding sites observed in cryo-EM isn't experimentally established (for example by mutating the binding site) and it thus seems too preliminary to infer that they are important for function.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> In this manuscript, the membrane component of the sialic acid-specific TRAP transporter, SiaQM (HiSiaQM), from H. influenzae, is structurally characterized. TRAP transporters are substrate binding protein (SBP)-dependent secondary-active transporters, and HiSiaQM is the most comprehensively studied member of this family. While all previous work on fused TRAP transporter membrane proteins suggests that they are monomeric (including the previous structural characterization of HiSiaQM by a different group), a surprising finding from this work is the observation that HiSiaQM can form higher oligomers, consistent with it being a dimer. These higher oligomeric states were initially observed after extraction of the protein with LMNG detergent but were also observed in DDM detergent, amphipol and nanodiscs using analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC). Structural characterization of dimeric HiSiaQM revealed 2 arrangements, parallel and antiparallel arrangements, the latter of which is unlikely to be physiologically relevant.

The higher resolution of this new structure of HiSiaQM (2.2-2.7 Å compared to 4.7 Å for the previous structure) facilitated the assignment of bound lipids at the dimer interface and a lipid molecule embedded in each of the protomers; allowed for a clearer refinement of the Na+ and putative substrate binding sites, which differ slightly from the previous structure; and produced better-modelled side chains for the residues involved in the SBP:HiSiaQM interaction. The authors developed a useful AUC-based assay to determine the affinity for this interaction revealing an affinity of 65 µM. Finally, the authors make the very interesting observation that a sialic acid-specific SBP from a different TRAP transporter can utilize HiSiaQM for transport, contrary to previous observations, revealing for the first time that TRAP membrane components can recognize multiple SBPs.

Overall, this is a well-written and presented manuscript detailing some interesting new observations about this interesting protein family. One of the main findings, that the protein can form a dimer, is supported by data, but the physiological relevance of this is questionable, and the possibility that this is artefactual has not been ruled out. Conclusions regarding the mechanistic importance of the lipid-binding sites are not currently supported by the data.

Strengths:<br /> The main strength of this work is the increased resolution of HiSiaQM, which allows for a much more precise assignment of side chains and their orientation. This will be of importance for subsequent mechanistic studies on the contributions of these residues to Na+ and sialic acid binding and conformational changes.

The observation of the lipids, especially the lipid embedded near the fusion helix, is an intriguing observation, which lays the groundwork for future work to understand the lipid-dependence of these transporters. The development of the AUC-based approach to measure SBP affinity for the membrane component will likely prove useful to future studies.

Weaknesses:<br /> One of the main results from this work is the observation that HiSiaQM can form a dimer. Two arrangements were observed, parallel and antiparallel, the latter of which is almost certainly physiologically irrelevant as it would preclude essential interactions with the extracytoplasmic substrate-binding protein. As acknowledged by the author, this non-physiological arrangement is likely a consequence of protein preparation (overexpression, extraction, purification, etc.). However, if one dismisses the antiparallel arrangement as non-relevant and an artefact of protein preparation, it is difficult for the parallel arrangement to maintain its credibility, as it was also processed in the same way. This is especially true when one considers that there is only 100 Å2 buried surface area in the parallel arrangement that does not involve any sidechains; it is difficult to envisage this as a specific interaction, e.g. compared to related proteins that have ~2000 Å2 buried surface area. Unless this dimerization is observed in a bacterial membrane at physiological protein concentrations, it is difficult to rule out the possibility that the observed dimerization is merely an artefact caused by the expression, purification and concentration of the protein.

The manuscript contains some excellent structural analysis of this protein, whose higher resolution reveals some new and interesting insights. However, a weakness of the current work is a lack of validation of these observations using other approaches. For example, lipid interactions are observed in the structure that the authors claim is mechanistically important. However, without disrupting these interactions to look at the effect on transport, this conclusion is not supported. Similarly, the authors use their structure to predict residues that are important for the SBP:membrane protein interaction, and they develop an AUC-based binding assay to study this interaction, but they do not test their predictions using this approach.

Reviewer #3 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> The manuscript reports new molecular characterization of the Haemophilus influenza tripartite ATP-independent periplasmic (TRAP) transporter of N-acetylneuraminate (Neu5Ac). This membrane transporter is important for the virulence of the pathogen. H. influenza lacks Neu5Ac biosynthetic pathway and utilizes the TRAP transporter to import it. Neu5Ac is used as a nutrient source but also as a protection from the human immune response. The transporter is composed of two fused membrane subunits, HiSiaQM, and one soluble, periplasmic subunit HiSiaP. HiSiaP, by binding to the substrate Neu5Ac, changes its conformation, allowing its binding to HiSiaQM, followed by Neu5Ac and Na+ transport to the cytoplasm. The combination of structural, biophysical and biochemical approaches provides a solid basis for describing the functioning of the Haemophilus influenza Neu5Ac TRAP transporter, which is essential for the pathogen virulence.

Strengths:<br /> The paper describes the electron microscopy structure of HiSiaQM, thanks to its solubilization in L-MNG followed by the exchange to amphipol or nanodisc. In these conditions, HiSiaQM consists of a mixture of monomers and dimers, as characterized by analytical ultracentrifugation. The cryo-EM analysis shows two types of dimers: one in an antiparallel configuration, which is artifactual, and a parallel one, which may be physiologically relevant. Cryo-EM on the dimers allows high-resolution (≈ 3 Å) structure determination. The structure is the first one of a fused SiaQM, and is the first obtained without megabody. The work highlights structural elements (fusion helix, lipids) that could modulate transport. The authors checked the functionality of the purified HiSiaQM, which, after reconstitution in liposome, displays a significantly larger Neu5Ac transport activity compared to the non-fused PpSiaQM homolog. The work identifies Na+ binding sites, and the putative Neu5Ac binding site. From analytical ultracentrifugation using fluorescently labelled HiSiaP, the authors show that HiSiaP is able to interact with HiSiaQM monomer and dimer, with a low but physiologically relevant affinity. HiSiaP interaction with HiSiaQM was modelled using AlphaFold2, and discussed in view of published activity on mutants, and new transport activity assays using SiaQM and SiaP from different organisms. In conclusion, the combination of structural, biophysical and biochemical approaches provides a solid basis for describing the functioning of this TRAP fused transporter.

Weakness:<br /> This work evidences in vitro a HiSiaQM dimer, whose in vivo relevance is not ascertained. However, the authors are very careful, not to over-interpret their data, and their conclusions regarding the transporter structure and function are valid irrespective of its state of association.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> Parkinson and colleagues address an interesting and important question, i.e. whether the bumblebee Bombus terrestris can receive field-realistic concentrations of different pesticides in a sugar solution mimicking nectar. The study directly follows up on a previous study conducted by the same team (Kessler et al. 2015, Nature), which was partly questioned by another more recent study (Arce et al. 2018, Proc R. Soc. B). The authors apply a combination of electrophysiological measurements and behavioral feeding tests to answer this question. Their results strongly suggest that B. terrestris workers are not able to perceive field-realistic doses of pesticides in a sugar solution. They additionally show that B. terrestris can physiologically differentiate between solutions varying in sugar composition.

Strengths:<br /> Sophisticated methodology, combination of approaches, clear and precise language. The stats questions have been addressed to my satisfaction. In terms of interpretation, however, several suggestions and comments were provided from an ecological perspective, which was deemed important, while the authors have expressed their intent to concentrate on the electrophysiological mechanism. Given that this study was motivated by conflicting results from earlier research, which were frequently employed to discuss the authors' findings, I still find that the discussion needs to be expanded in order to encompass a wider context.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:<br /> This manuscript is part of the Wright lab's ongoing studies that investigate whether the bumblebee B. terrestris can detect the presence of pesticides when feeding. Previously, they showed that B. terrestris cannot detect neonicotinoids and would prefer food containing neonicotinoids (Kessler et al. 2015). However, in that paper, they showed that B. terrestris cannot taste neonicotinoids but did not provide evidence on why B. terrestris prefer food containing neonicotinoids. In the current paper, the authors continue to suggest that B. terrestris cannot taste neonicotinoids as well as another insecticide, sulfoxaflor, based on additional behavioral experiments and electrophysiological experiments focusing on specific GRNs. While the data from these experiments continue to suggest that B. terrestris cannot taste these insecticides using their mouthparts, whether B. terrestris can actually perceive these insecticides, and why this species prefers food containing these compounds remains unknown.

Strengths:<br /> The authors provided additional evidence that B. terrestris cannot taste neonicotinoids with their mouthparts. The authors have addressed my concerns regarding overgeneralization and that parts of the manuscript were written in a way that sounded combative with studies from other groups that had come to slightly different conclusions from their previous paper.

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The article "A randomized multiplex CRISPRi-Seq approach for the identification of critical combinations of genes" describes the development of a multiplex randomized CRISPRi screening method that they named MurCiS and applied it to study redundancy of L. pneumophila virulence factors. The authors used a L. pneumophila strain carrying dCas9 on the chromosome that they had constructed for a CRISPRi screen they had published recently and here combined it with self-assembly randomized multiplex CRISPR arrays that they developed. The strains carrying the dCas9 and the different CRISPRi arrays were used to infect U937 or Acanthamoeba castellanii cells and the intracellular growth phenotypes were recorded as readout. This allowed the authors to identify certain gene combinations that when knocked down induced a growth defect in either or both cells tested but not when they were knocked down alone. A particular gene combination caught their attention, as the genes lpg2888 and lpg3000 were inducing a growth defect only when both were knocked down in U937 cells but in A. castellanii cells lpg3000 alone was sufficient to cause a growth defect.

The concept of using CRISPRi to look at functional redundancy in effectors is a very useful one to the Legionella field and where biological redundancy limits studies. It has the potential to uncover virulence effectors of importance that have not been described before.

Comments on revised version: In this revised version the authors have answered our concerns satisfactorily except the point related to the use of only one guide per gene.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The study by Ellis et al. documents the development of a CRISPR interference (CRISPRi) screen aiming at identifying virulence-critical genes of Legionella pneumophila, the facultative intracellular bacterium causing Legionnaires' disease. L. pneumophila employs the Dot/Icm type IV secretion system to translocate more than 300 different "effector proteins" into host cells. Many effector proteins appear to have redundant functions, and therefore, depleting several of them is required to observe a strong intracellular replication phenotype. In the current study, Ellis et al. develop a "multiplex, randomized CRISPRi sequencing" (MuRCiS) approach to silence several effector genes simultaneously and randomly, thereby possibly causing synthetic lethality for L. pneumophila upon infection of host cells.

The MuRCiS approach comprises the ligation of different CRISPR spacers flanked by repeats in presence of "dead end" oligonucleotide pairs capping a random array of building blocks to be inserted into a library vector. Thus, spacer arrays with an average of 3.3 spacers per array were obtained. As a proof-of-concept, spacer arrays targeting 44 transmembrane effector-encoding L. pneumophila genes were employed to screen for intracellular growth defects in macrophages and amoeba. Consequently, novel pairs of synergistically functioning effector genes were identified by comparative next-generation sequencing of the input and output pools of spacer arrays.

A major strength of this well-written and straightforward study is the construction and use of random and multiplexed CRISPRi arrays, allowing an unbiased and comprehensive screen for multiple genes affecting the intracellular growth of L. pneumophila. The ingenious approach established by Ellis et al. will be useful for further genetic analysis of L. pneumophila infection and might also be adopted for other pathogens employing a large set of (functionally redundant) virulence factors.<br /> The reviewer's suggestion to test the single and double L. pneumophila effector mutant strains for growth in protozoa other than A. castellanii was considered beyond the scope of the current manuscript describing the optimization of the MuRCiS platform. The authors have satisfactorily addressed the minor points raised previously.