The thymus is continuously seeded by progenitors derived from hematopoietic stem cells, which reside in the BM. These progenitors migrate via the blood stream into the thymus, where they adopt a T cell fate, proliferate, and diff erentiate into mature functional T cells. This differentiation process is characterized by multiple developmental stages. The earliest thymic progenitors lack surface expression of CD4 and CD8 and are therefore referred to as doublenegative (DN) thymocytes. They subsequently up-regulate both CD4 and CD8 coreceptors (double positive [DP]) before undergoing positive and negative selection, and maturing to CD4 and CD8 single-positive (SP) thymocytes that emigrate to the periphery. Immature DN thymocytes can be subdivided into four subpopulations according to the surface expression of CD117, CD44, and CD25. The most immature thymocyte progenitors (DN1) express CD117 and CD44 and are negative for CD25, followed by the DN2 population, which upregulates CD25, and the DN3 cells, which downregulate CD117 and CD44 before generating DN4 thymocytes lacking expression of all three markers ( 1, 2 ).Over the last decade, many reports highlighted the importance of the evolutionarily conserved Notch cascade for the lymphoid system ( 3 ). Mammals possess 4 Notch receptors (N1 -4), which are activated by two classes of Thymic T cell lineage commitment is dependent on Notch1 (N1) receptor -mediated signaling. Although the physiological ligands that interact with N1 expressed on thymic precursors are currently unknown, in vitro culture systems point to Delta-like 1 (DL1) and DL4 as prime candidates. Using DL1 -and DL4-lacZ reporter knock-in mice and novel monoclonal antibodies to DL1 and DL4, we show that DL4 is expressed on thymic epithelial cells (TECs), whereas DL1 is not detected. The function of DL4 was further explored in vivo by generating mice in which DL4 could be specifi cally inactivated in TECs or in hematopoietic progenitors. Although loss of DL4 in hematopoietic progenitors did not perturb thymus development, inactivation of DL4 in TECs led to a complete block in T cell development coupled with the ectopic appearance of immature B cells in the thymus. These immature B cells were phenotypically indistinguishable from those developing in the thymus of conditional N1 mutant mice. Collectively, our results demonstrate that DL4 is the essential and nonredundant N1 ligand responsible for T cell lineage commitment. Moreover, they strongly suggest that N1-expressing thymic progenitors interact with DL4-expressing TECs to suppress B lineage potential and to induce the fi rst steps of intrathymic T cell development.

Notch1 (N1) receptor signaling is essential and sufficient for T cell development, and recently developed in vitro culture systems point to members of the Delta family as being the physiological N1 ligands. We explored the ability of Delta1 (DL1) and DL4 to induce T cell lineage commitment and/or maturation in vitro and in vivo from bone marrow (BM) precursors conditionally gene targeted for N1 and/or N2. In vitro DL1 can trigger T cell lineage commitment via either N1 or N2. N1- or N2-mediated T cell lineage commitment can also occur in the spleen after short-term BM transplantation. However, N2–DL1–mediated signaling does not allow further T cell maturation beyond the CD25+ stage due to a lack of T cell receptor β expression. In contrast to DL1, DL4 induces and supports T cell commitment and maturation in vitro and in vivo exclusively via specific interaction with N1. Moreover, comparative binding studies show preferential interaction of DL4 with N1, whereas binding of DL1 to N1 is weak. Interestingly, preferential N1–DL4 binding reflects reduced dependence of this interaction on Lunatic fringe, a glycosyl transferase that generally enhances the avidity of Notch receptors for Delta ligands. Collectively, our results establish a hierarchy of Notch–Delta interactions in which N1–DL4 exhibits the greatest capacity to induce and support T cell development.

Activation of K(+) channels by the G protein βγ subunits is an important signaling mechanism of G-protein-coupled receptors. Typically, receptor-activated K(+) currents desensitize in the sustained presence of agonists to avoid excessive effects on cellular activity. The auxiliary GABAB receptor subunit KCTD12 induces fast and pronounced desensitization of the K(+) current response. Using proteomic and electrophysiological approaches, we now show that KCTD12-induced desensitization results from a dual interaction with the G protein: constitutive binding stabilizes the heterotrimeric G protein at the receptor, whereas dynamic binding to the receptor-activated Gβγ subunits induces desensitization by uncoupling Gβγ from the effector K(+) channel. While receptor-free KCTD12 desensitizes K(+) currents activated by other GPCRs in vitro, native KCTD12 is exclusively associated with GABAB receptors. Accordingly, genetic ablation of KCTD12 specifically alters GABAB responses in the brain. Our results show that GABAB receptors are endowed with fast and reversible desensitization by harnessing KCTD12 that intercepts Gβγ signaling.

GABAB receptors (GBRs) are key regulators of synaptic release but little is known about trafficking mechanisms that control their presynaptic abundance. We now show that sequence-related epitopes in APP, AJAP-1 and PIANP bind with nanomolar affinities to the N-terminal sushi-domain of presynaptic GBRs. Of the three interacting proteins, selectively the genetic loss of APP impaired GBR-mediated presynaptic inhibition and axonal GBR expression. Proteomic and functional analyses revealed that APP associates with JIP and calsyntenin proteins that link the APP/GBR complex in cargo vesicles to the axonal trafficking motor. Complex formation with GBRs stabilizes APP at the cell surface and reduces proteolysis of APP to Aβ, a component of senile plaques in Alzheimer’s disease patients. Thus, APP/GBR complex formation links presynaptic GBR trafficking to Aβ formation. Our findings support that dysfunctional axonal trafficking and reduced GBR expression in Alzheimer’s disease increases Aβ formation.