Article

v-SNARE composition distinguishes synaptic vesicle pools.

Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Neuron (Impact Factor: 15.77). 08/2011; 71(3):474-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.06.010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Synaptic vesicles belong to two distinct pools, a recycling pool responsible for the evoked release of neurotransmitter and a resting pool unresponsive to stimulation. The uniform appearance of synaptic vesicles has suggested that differences in location or cytoskeletal association account for these differences in function. We now find that the v-SNARE tetanus toxin-insensitive vesicle-associated membrane protein (VAMP7) differs from other synaptic vesicle proteins in its distribution to the two pools, providing evidence that they differ in molecular composition. We also find that both resting and recycling pools undergo spontaneous release, and when activated by deletion of the longin domain, VAMP7 influences the properties of release. Further, the endocytosis that follows evoked and spontaneous release differs in mechanism, and specific sequences confer targeting to the different vesicle pools. The results suggest that different endocytic mechanisms generate synaptic vesicles with different proteins that can endow the vesicles with distinct properties.

1 Bookmark
 · 
124 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The synaptic vesicle (SV) cycle has been studied extensively in cultured cells and slice preparations, but not much is known about the roles and relative contributions of endocytic pathways and mechanisms of SV recycling in vivo, under physiological patterns of activity. We employed horseradish peroxidase (HRP) as an in vivo marker of endocytosis at the calyx of Held synapse in the awake rat. Ex vivo serial section scanning electron microscopy and 3D reconstructions revealed two categories of labelled structures: HRP-filled SVs and large cisternal endosomes. Inhibition of adaptor protein complexes 1 and 3 (AP-1, AP-3) by in vivo application of Brefeldin A (BFA) disrupted endosomal SV budding while SV recycling via clathrin-mediated endocytosis (CME) remained unaffected. In conclusion, our study establishes cisternal endosomes as an intermediate of the SV cycle and reveals CME and endosomal budding as the predominant mechanisms of SV recycling in a tonically active central synapse in vivo.
    Traffic 09/2012; · 4.65 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Synaptic vesicles release neurotransmitter at chemical synapses, thus initiating the flow of information in neural networks. To achieve this, vesicles undergo a dynamic cycle of fusion and retrieval to maintain the structural and functional integrity of the presynaptic terminals in which they reside. Moreover, compelling evidence indicates these vesicles differ in their availability for release and mobilization in response to stimuli, prompting classification into at least three different functional pools. Ongoing studies of the molecular and cellular bases for this heterogeneity attempt to link structure to physiology and clarify how regulation of vesicle pools influences synaptic strength and presynaptic plasticity. We discuss prevailing perspectives on vesicle pools, the role they play in shaping synaptic transmission, and the open questions that challenge current understanding.
    Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology 06/2012; 4(8):a013680. · 9.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Central synapses operate neurotransmission in several modes: synchronous/fast neurotransmission (neurotransmitters are released quickly and release is tightly coupled to action potentials), asynchronous neurotransmission (neurotransmitter release is slower and longer lasting), and spontaneous neurotransmission (where small amounts of neurotransmitter are released without being evoked by an action potential). A substantial body of evidence from the past two decades suggests that seemingly identical synaptic vesicles possess distinct propensities to fuse, thus selectively serving different modes of neurotransmission. In efforts to better understand the mechanism(s) underlying the different modes of synaptic transmission, many research groups found that synaptic vesicles used in different modes of neurotransmission differ by a number of synaptic proteins. Synchronous transmission with higher temporal fidelity to stimulation seems to require synaptotagmin 1 and complexin for its Ca(2+) sensitivity, RIM proteins for closer location of synaptic vesicles (SV) to the voltage operated calcium channels (VGCC), and dynamin for SV retrieval. Asynchronous release does not seem to require functional synaptotagmin 1 as a calcium sensor or complexins, but the activity of dynamin is indispensible for its maintenance. On the other hand, the control of spontaneous neurotransmission remains less clear as deleting a number of essential synaptic proteins does not abolish this type of synaptic vesicle fusion. VGCC distance from the SV seems to have little control on spontaneous transmission, while there is an involvement of functional synaptic proteins including synaptotagmins and complexin. Recently, presynaptic deficits have been proposed to contribute to a number of pathological conditions including cognitive and mental disorders. In this review, we evaluate recent advances in understanding the regulatory mechanisms of synaptic vesicle dynamics and in understanding how different molecular substrates maintain selective modes of neurotransmission. We also highlight the implications of these studies in understanding pathological conditions. © 2013 International Society for Neurochemistry, J. Neurochem. (2013) 10.1111/jnc.12245.
    Journal of Neurochemistry 03/2013; · 3.97 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

View
34 Downloads
Available from
May 27, 2014