Adult zebrafish, in contrast to mammals, regenerate neurons in their brain, but the extent and variability of this capacity is unclear. Here we ask whether the loss of various dopaminergic neuron populations is sufficient to trigger their functional regeneration. Both sexes of zebrafish were analyzed. Genetic lineage tracing shows that specific diencephalic ependymo-radial glial (ERG) progenitor cells give rise to new dopaminergic [tyrosine hydroxylase-positive (TH ϩ)] neurons. Ablation elicits an immune response, increased proliferation of ERG progenitor cells, and increased addition of new TH ϩ neurons in populations that constitutively add new neurons (e.g., diencephalic population 5/6). Inhibiting the immune response attenuates neurogenesis to control levels. Boosting the immune response enhances ERG proliferation, but not addition of TH ϩ neurons. In contrast, in populations in which constitutive neurogenesis is undetectable (e.g., the posterior tuberculum and locus ceruleus), cell replacement and tissue integration are incomplete and transient. This is associated with a loss of spinal TH ϩ axons, as well as permanent deficits in shoaling and reproductive behavior. Hence, dopaminergic neuron populations in the adult zebrafish brain show vast differences in regenerative capacity that correlate with constitutive addition of neurons and depend on immune system activation.

Adult zebrafish regenerate neurons in their brain, but the extent and variability of this capacity is unclear. Here we ask whether loss of various dopaminergic neuron populations is sufficient to trigger their functional regeneration. Genetic lineage tracing shows that specific diencephalic ependymo-radial glial progenitor cells (ERGs) give rise to new dopaminergic (Th+) neurons. Ablation elicits an immune response, increased proliferation of ERGs and increased addition of new Th+ neurons in populations that constitutively add new neurons, e.g. diencephalic population 5/6. Inhibiting the immune response attenuates neurogenesis to control levels. Boosting the immune response enhances ERG proliferation, but not addition of Th+ neurons. In contrast, in populations in which constitutive neurogenesis is undetectable, e.g. the posterior tuberculum and locus coeruleus, cell replacement and tissue integration are incomplete and transient. This is associated with loss of spinal Th+ axons, as well as permanent deficits in shoaling and reproductive behaviour. Hence, dopaminergic neuron populations in the adult zebrafish brain show vast differences in regenerative capacity that correlate with constitutive addition of neurons and depend on immune system activation.

Technological developments in recent years have led to a surge in advances in neuroimmunology, making real progress towards improving human health. With the scale of the challenges ahead, realising this potential requires a collaborative effort. The neuroscience, immunology and wider scientific community, both academia and industry, must come together to pool together ideas, experiences and resources.

Neuroimmunology in the broadest sense is the study of interactions between the nervous and the immune systems. These interactions play important roles in health from supporting neural development, homeostasis and plasticity to modifying behaviour. Neuroimmunology is increasingly recognised as a field with the potential to deliver a significant positive impact on human health and treatment for neurological and psychiatric disorders. Yet, translation to the clinic is hindered by fundamental knowledge gaps on the underlying mechanisms of action or the optimal timing of an intervention, and a lack of appropriate tools to visualise and modulate both systems. Here we propose ten key disease-agnostic research questions that, if addressed, could lead to significant progress within neuroimmunology in the short to medium term. We also discuss four cross-cutting themes to be considered when addressing each question: i) bi-directionality of neuroimmune interactions; ii) the biological context in which the questions are addressed (e.g. health vs disease vs across the lifespan); iii) tools and technologies required to fully answer the questions; and iv) translation into the clinic. We acknowledge that these ten questions cannot represent the full breadth of gaps in our understanding; rather they focus on areas which, if addressed, may have the most broad and immediate impacts. By defining these neuroimmunology priorities, we hope to unite existing and future research teams, who can make meaningful progress through a collaborative and cross-disciplinary effort.