Cited by 30Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Neuronal Cx3cr1 Deficiency Protects against Amyloid β-Induced Neurotoxicity

Open access
Dworzak, Jenny, Renvoisé, Benoît, Habchi, Johnny, Yates, Emma V., Combadière, Christophe, Knowles, Tuomas P., Dobson, Christopher M., Blackstone, Craig +2 more·2015·PLOS ONE

Abstract

Cx3cr1, the receptor for the chemokine Cx3cl1 (fractalkine), has been implicated in the progression and severity of Alzheimer's disease-like pathology in mice, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. A complicating factor is that Cx3cr1 has been demonstrated in both neurons and microglia. Here, we have dissected the differences between neuronal and microglial Cx3cr1, specifically by comparing direct amyloid-β-induced toxicity in cultured, mature, microglia-depleted hippocampal neurons from wild-type and Cx3cr1-/- mice. Wild-type neurons expressed both Cx3cl1 and Cx3cr1 and released Cx3cl1 in response to amyloid-β. Knockout of neuronal Cx3cr1 abated amyloid-β-induced lactate dehydrogenase release. Furthermore, amyloid-β differentially induced depression of pre- and postsynaptic components of miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents, in a peptide conformation-dependent manner. Knockout of neuronal Cx3cr1 abated effects of both amyloid-β conformational states, which were differentiable by aggregation kinetics and peptide morphology. We obtained similar results after both acute and chronic treatment of cultured neurons with the Cx3cr1 antagonist F1. Thus, neuronal Cx3cr1 may impact Alzheimer's disease-like pathology by modulating conformational state-dependent amyloid-β-induced synaptotoxicity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0127730

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The hippocampus is thought to be particularly vulnerable to insults.

    “it is thought to be particularly vulnerable to insults17.”

    From Constitutive expression of CX3CR1-BAC-Cre introduces minimal off-target effects in microglia (2026) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Discussion says hippocampal neurons are more susceptible than cortical neurons to Aβ toxicity. That supports particular vulnerability to one insult, but the claim generalizes to insults more broadly, which this passage does not establish. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The hippocampus recapitulates the developmental trajectory throughout life.

    “Since the hippocampus recapitulates the developmental trajectory throughout life”

    From Constitutive expression of CX3CR1-BAC-Cre introduces minimal off-target effects in microglia (2026) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Results describe Cx3cr1 expression in cultured postnatal mouse hippocampal neurons, not the hippocampus’s developmental trajectory throughout life. The Discussion notes that the study’s neonatal, in vitro model limits its application to the aging human CNS. Searches for the claimed trajectory and adult hippocampal neurogenesis found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dworzak, J., Renvoisé, B., Habchi, J., Yates, E. V., Combadière, C., Knowles, T. P., Dobson, C. M., Blackstone, C., Paulsen, O., & Murphy, P. M.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Inserm (FR)
Corresponding author
  • Paulsen, Ole
  • Murphy, Philip M.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2015-06-03
Volume
10
Issue
6
Pages
e0127730
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W576141130
Cited by
30
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2016: 5
FWCI
2.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
  • NHLBI Division of Intramural Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
CX3CR1, fractalkine, amyloid-beta, Alzheimer's disease, microglia, synaptotoxicity, excitatory postsynaptic currents, peptide aggregation, hippocampal neurons, neuroprotection
MeSH terms
CX3C Chemokine Receptor 1, Alzheimer Disease, Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Synaptic Transmission, Neurons, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Mice, Knockout, Receptors, Chemokine, Mice, Protein Aggregation, Pathological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review