Back

Stochastic Misfolding Drives the Emergence of Distinct α-Synuclein Strains

So, R. W. L.; Frieg, B.; Camino, J. D.; Silver, N. R. G.; Mao, A.; Stuart, E.; Schröder, G. F.; Watts, J. C.

2025-06-07 neuroscience
10.1101/2025.06.03.657690 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The existence of -synuclein conformational strains provides a potential explanation for the clinical and pathological differences among synucleinopathies such as Parkinsons disease and multiple system atrophy. However, how distinct -synuclein strains are formed in vivo remains unknown. Here, we examined whether unique strains of self-propagating -synuclein aggregates can arise within a consistent molecular environment. Unexpectedly, we observed conformational heterogeneity between individual preparations of -synuclein pre-formed fibrils (PFFs) generated by polymerizing recombinant wild-type or A53T-mutant human -synuclein under identical conditions. Moreover, we found that -synuclein aggregates formed spontaneously in the brains of a transgenic synucleinopathy mouse model were conformationally diverse, leading to the identification of three distinct disease subtypes. Propagation of putative PFF- and brain-derived -synuclein strains in mice initiated several distinct synucleinopathies, characterized by differences in disease onset times, cerebral -synuclein deposition patterns, and the conformational attributes of -synuclein aggregates. The conformational diversity of -synuclein aggregates across PFF preparations and between the brains of individual transgenic mice demonstrates that -synuclein can spontaneously form multiple self-propagating strains within an identical environment both in vitro and in vivo. This suggests that stochastic misfolding into distinct aggregate structures drives the emergence of -synuclein strains and implies that the intrinsic variability of common synucleinopathy research tools must be considered when designing and interpreting experiments.

Published in Neuron (predicted rank #20) · training set

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.