↓ Skip to main content

Neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis with DNAJC5/CSPα mutation has PPT1 pathology and exhibit aberrant protein palmitoylation

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Neuropathologica, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis with DNAJC5/CSPα mutation has PPT1 pathology and exhibit aberrant protein palmitoylation
Published in
Acta Neuropathologica, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00401-015-1512-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael X. Henderson, Gregory S. Wirak, Yong-quan Zhang, Feng Dai, Stephen D. Ginsberg, Natalia Dolzhanskaya, John F. Staropoli, Peter C. G. Nijssen, TuKiet T. Lam, Amy F. Roth, Nicholas G. Davis, Glyn Dawson, Milen Velinov, Sreeganga S. Chandra

Abstract

Neuronal ceroid lipofuscinoses (NCL) are a group of inherited neurodegenerative disorders with lysosomal pathology (CLN1-14). Recently, mutations in the DNAJC5/CLN4 gene, which encodes the presynaptic co-chaperone CSPα were shown to cause autosomal-dominant NCL. Although 14 NCL genes have been identified, it is unknown if they act in common disease pathways. Here we show that two disease-associated proteins, CSPα and the depalmitoylating enzyme palmitoyl-protein thioesterase 1 (PPT1/CLN1) are biochemically linked. We find that in DNAJC5/CLN4 patient brains, PPT1 is massively increased and mis-localized. Surprisingly, the specific enzymatic activity of PPT1 is dramatically reduced. Notably, we demonstrate that CSPα is depalmitoylated by PPT1 and hence its substrate. To determine the consequences of PPT1 accumulation, we compared the palmitomes from control and DNAJC5/CLN4 patient brains by quantitative proteomics. We discovered global changes in protein palmitoylation, mainly involving lysosomal and synaptic proteins. Our findings establish a functional link between two forms of NCL and serve as a springboard for investigations of NCL disease pathways.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 19%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Other 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 23%
Neuroscience 12 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 15 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#12,940,187
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica
#1,998
of 2,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,270
of 388,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica
#33
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 388,829 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.