Dendritic morphology was comparable in Shank3-deficient rats and controls
Basal and apical dendrites were reconstructed from WT (Fig. 3A), Shank3-Het, (Fig. 3B) and Shank3-KO rats (Fig. 3C). As the number of complete apical dendrites from each animal was insufficient for analysis, the data on arborization and spines of apical dendrites is not included here. Basal dendrites from 6 neurons were reconstructed from each animal (Table 1).
Table 1: Summary of number of animals, neurons and spines in the confocal data by genotype
|
WT
|
Het
|
KO
|
Animals
|
3 males, 3 females
|
3 males, 3 females
|
3 males, 3 females
|
Neurons
|
36 (6 each)
|
36 (6 each)
|
36 (6 each)
|
Total spines
|
10022 (1511 – 2009)
|
9739 (1456 – 1793)
|
9633 (1340 – 1828)
|
· Thin
|
7798 (1130 – 1631)
|
7247 (1035 – 1368)
|
7350 (973 – 1333)
|
· Stubby
|
1280 (159 – 287)
|
1710 (169 – 365)
|
1511 (130 – 358)
|
· Mushroom
|
707 (62 – 198)
|
495 (48 – 121)
|
547 (77 – 144)
|
· Filopodia
|
38 (0 – 14)
|
94 (9 – 22)
|
75 (3 – 27)
|
· Branched
|
199 (7 – 55)
|
193 (1 – 92)
|
150 (7 – 42)
|
Data shows total counts for each category, with the numbers in parentheses indicating the range.
The mean length of basal dendrites was comparable among the WT, Shank3-Het, and Shank3-KO (F[2,15] = 2.02, p = 0.17; Fig. 3D). Furthermore, Sholl analysis at 30 mm incremental distance from the cell soma revealed no effect of genotype on dendritic length (F[2,120] = 1.19, p = 0.31; Fig. 3E) or number of intersections (F[2,105] = 0.23, p = 0.80; Fig. 3F) of basal dendrites.
Basal spine density and morphology were unchanged in Shank3-deficient rats
Deconvolved confocal images of basal dendritic segments (Fig. 4A) were reconstructed in three dimensions (Fig. 4B) to analyze spine density and morphology (Table 1). There was no effect of genotype on total spine density (F[2,15] = 0.67, p = 0.53; Fig. 4C). Spine densities analyzed by the different classes of spines, whether thin (F[2,15] = 0.44, p = 0.65; Fig. 4D), stubby (F[2,15] = 1.49, p = 0.26; Fig. 4E), mushroom (F[2,15] = 1.56, p = 0.24; Fig. 4F), filopodia (F[2,15] = 2.97, p = 0.08; Fig. 4G), or branched (F[2,15] = 0.12, p = 0.89; Fig. 4H), were also comparable among the three genotypes.
A comparison of spine HDs among the various spine classes revealed no significant effect of genotype on total (F[2,15] = 0.56, p = 0.58; Fig. 5A), thin (F[2,15] = 0.92, p = 0.42; Fig. 5B), stubby (F[2,15] = 1.74, p = 0.21; Fig. 5C), mushroom (F[2,15] = 2.07, p = 0.16; Fig. 5D), filopodia (F[2,14] = 3.02, p = 0.08; Fig. 5E), or branched spines (F[2,15] = 3.5, p = 0.06; Fig. 5F). Spine head volumes were also comparable among the three genotypes for total (F[2,15] = 0.83, p = 0.46; Fig. 5G), thin (F[2,15] = 2.08, p = 0.16; Fig. 5H), stubby (F[2,15] = 0.23, p = 0.8; Fig. 5I), mushroom (F[2,15] = 0.98, p = 0.4; Fig. 5J), filopodia (F[2,14] = 1.37, p = 0.29; Fig. 5K), and branched spines (F[2,15] = 0.94, p = 0.41; Fig. 5L).
Analysis of the cumulative frequency distribution of total spine HDs revealed that Shank3-Het and Shank3-KO rats were significantly different from the WT (p = 0.0008 and 0.0001 respectively; Fig. 6A). This difference was also evident in the HD of thin spines (both p < 0.0001; Fig. 6B). The distribution of stubby spines in Shank3-Het rats was significantly different than that in Shank3-KO (p = 0.0258; Fig. 6C). The distribution of mushroom (Fig. 6D), filopodia, and branched spine HD was comparable among the three genotypes.
Cumulative frequency distribution of total spine head volumes was significantly different in Shank3-KO rats compared to Shank3-Het and WT (both p < 0.0001; Fig. 6E). In the distribution of thin spines, Shank3-Het and Shank3-KO rats were significantly different from WT and from each other (all p < 0.0001, Fig. 6F). The distribution of stubby spines in Shank3-KO rats was significantly different from WT (p = 0.0205; Fig. 6G). Notably, the distribution of spine head volumes was shifted to the right in Shank3-Het compared to the other two genotypes for both thin (both p < 0.0001, Fig. 6F) and mushroom spines (both p < 0.0001, Fig. 6H), indicating more frequent large head volumes. There was no significant difference in the distribution of head volumes among the three genotypes for filopodia and branched spines.
Synapse density was unchanged in Shank3-deficient rats compared to controls
For quantifying synapse density, approximately 7,000 unique synapses (mean = 389 and range = 287 to 480 per animal; Table 2) were counted, with an average of 351 non-perforated and 38 perforated synapses per animal (Table 2).
Table 2: Summary of number of synapses included in EM data by genotype
|
WT
|
Het
|
KO
|
Animals
|
6 males
|
6 males
|
6 males
|
Synapse Density
|
· Total
|
2150 (287 – 434)
|
2523 (387 – 448)
|
2336 (338 – 380)
|
· Non-perforated
|
1947 (271- 380)
|
2276 (348 – 406)
|
2099 (306 – 431)
|
· Perforated
|
203 (16 – 54)
|
247 (28 - 55)
|
237 (26 – 51)
|
Reconstructed synapses
|
· Total
|
1034 (155 – 194)
|
1213 (175 – 214)
|
1130 (156 – 253)
|
· Non-perforated
|
835 (128 – 153)
|
972 (137 – 178)
|
899 (127 – 202)
|
· Perforated
|
199 (17 – 55)
|
241 (31 – 53)
|
231 (26 – 51)
|
Data shows total counts for each category, with the numbers in parentheses indicating the range.
We did not find significant differences in total synapse density amongst Shank3-Het, Shank3-KO, or WT control rats (F[2,15] = 2.95, p = 0.08, Fig. 7A-D). Non-perforated (Fig. 7E) and perforated synapse densities (Fig. 7F) were also comparable (F[2,15] = 3.29, p = 0.07 and F[2,15] = 0.54, p = 0.60, respectively) amongst the three genotypes.
Subtle changes in synaptic ultrastructure were present in Shank3 heterozygotes
In order to measure PSD length, PSD area, and HD, approximately 150 to 250 synapses were reconstructed per animal, including between 128 to 202 non-perforated and 17 to 55 perforated synapses (Table 2). There were no significant differences in total PSD length when comparing Shank3-Het, Shank3-KO, and WT rats (F[2,15] = 2.74, p = 0.10; Fig. 8A). Additionally, the PSD lengths of non-perforated (F[2,15] = 2.73, p = 0.10, Fig. 8B) and perforated synapses (F[2,15] = 0.21, p = 0.81; Fig. 8C) were comparable between Shank3-deficient and WT rats.
However, maximal HD was significantly altered in the Shank3-Het group, but not in the Shank3-KO, when compared to the WT. Total HD was significantly higher (F[2,15] = 4.08, p = 0.04) in the Shank3-Het rats compared to the WT (Fig. 8D). We also found wider (F[2,15] = 5.67, p = 0.01) HD of non-perforated synapses in the Shank3-Het group compared to both WT and Shank3-KO rats (Fig. 8E). When we analyzed only the perforated synapses, there was no significant change in HD among the groups (F[2,15] = 2.60, p = 0.11; Fig. 8F).
The total PSD area was greater (F[2,15] = 4.28, p = 0.03) in the Shank3-Het rats compared to Shank3-KO (Fig. 8G). This change was evident in non-perforated synapses (F[2,15] = 3.38 and p = 0.06 when comparing all three groups, p < 0.05 between Shank3-Het and KO; Fig. 8H), as there was no significant change in PSD area of perforated synapses among the three groups (F[2,15] = 0.30, p = 0.75; Fig. 8I).