Functional Impact of CYFIP2 RNA Editing on Actin Regulation, Axon Growth, and Spinogenesis

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Cytoplasmic FMRP Interacting Protein 2 (CYFIP2) a component of the Wave Regulatory Complex (WRC), one of the most important players in regulating cellular actin dynamics. Interestingly, CYFIP2 transcript undergoes RNA editing, an epitranscriptomic modification catalysed by ADAR enzymes, that leads adenosine (A) to inosine (I) deamination. CYFIP2 editing in the coding sequence results in a K/E substitution at amino acid 320. The functional meaning of this regulation is still unknown. In this study, we aim at investigating the potential implication of CYFIP2 RNA editing related to actin dynamics during cell differentiation, axon development and synaptogenesis in neural cells. We have generated SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cell lines in which CYFIP2 gene has been functionally inactivated by CRISPR-Cas9 technology. CYFIP2 KO cells showed profound actin filaments disorganisation and loss of the capability to differentiate into a neuronal-like phenotype. Overexpression of both CYFIP2 unedited (K) and edited (E) isoforms rescued normal capability. Finally, we took advantage of primary neuronal culture where endogenous CYFIP2 was knocked down by shRNA technology and CYFIP2 editing variants were overexpressed. While CYFIP2 KD cells reported a decrease in axon development and spine frequency, CYFIP2-E variants increase the number of axon branches, total axon length and dendritic spine frequency compared to either CYFIP2 KD cells or CYFIP-K variants. Overall, our work reveals for the first time a functional significance of the CYFIP2 K/E RNA editing process in regulating the spreading of neuronal axons during the initial stages of in-vitro development and the process of spinogenesis.

Article activity feed

  1. Curious if CYFIP2 can be tagged while maintaining integrity of the WRC and if so, if there would be any difference in the efficiency of proper localization/targeting of the K vs E variants in your WT knockdown/overexpression context (either in differentiated SH-SY5Y cells or primary neurons).

    There does seem to loss of global polarity in CYFIP2 KO cells -- do you know if there are differences in the microtubule cytoskeleton/MTOC positioning in CYFIP2 KOs?

    Both these questions are kind of getting at whether there are other novel/unexpected functions of CYFIP2 or effects of their variants than what we would expect solely related to WRC integrity/activity.