Distinct regulation of dopamine D2S and D2L autoreceptor signaling by calcium

  1. Stephanie C Gantz
  2. Brooks G Robinson
  3. David C Buck
  4. James R Bunzow
  5. Rachael L Neve
  6. John T Williams
  7. Kim A Neve  Is a corresponding author
  1. Oregon Health and Science University, United States
  2. Oregon Health & Science University, United States
  3. United States Department of Veterans Affairs, United States
  4. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States

Abstract

D2 autoreceptors regulate dopamine release throughout the brain. Two isoforms of the D2 receptor, D2S and D2L, are expressed in midbrain dopamine neurons. Differential roles of these isoforms as autoreceptors are poorly understood. By virally expressing the isoforms in dopamine neurons of D2 receptor knockout mice, this study assessed the calcium-dependence and drug-induced plasticity of D2S and D2L receptor-dependent GIRK currents. The results reveal that D2S, but not D2L receptors, exhibited calcium-dependent desensitization similar to that exhibited by endogenous autoreceptors. Two pathways of calcium signaling that regulated D2 autoreceptor-dependent GIRK signaling were identified, which distinctly affected desensitization and the magnitude of D2S and D2L receptor-dependent GIRK currents. Previous in vivo cocaine exposure removed calcium-dependent D2 autoreceptor desensitization in wild type, but not D2S-only mice. Thus, expression of D2S as the exclusive autoreceptor was insufficient for cocaine-induced plasticity, implying a functional role for the co-expression of D2S and D2L autoreceptors.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Stephanie C Gantz

    Vollum Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Brooks G Robinson

    Vollum Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. David C Buck

    Research Service, VA Portland Health Care System, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. James R Bunzow

    Vollum Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Rachael L Neve

    Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. John T Williams

    Vollum Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Kim A Neve

    Research Service, VA Portland Health Care System, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Portland, United States
    For correspondence
    nevek@ohsu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All studies were conducted in accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health and were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees at the VA Portland Health Care System (#2577-12) and Oregon Health & Science University (IS01394).

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 2,954
    views
  • 555
    downloads
  • 38
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Stephanie C Gantz
  2. Brooks G Robinson
  3. David C Buck
  4. James R Bunzow
  5. Rachael L Neve
  6. John T Williams
  7. Kim A Neve
(2015)
Distinct regulation of dopamine D2S and D2L autoreceptor signaling by calcium
eLife 4:e09358.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09358

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09358

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Jacob A Miller
    Insight

    When navigating environments with changing rules, human brain circuits flexibly adapt how and where we retain information to help us achieve our immediate goals.

    1. Neuroscience
    Zhujun Shao, Mengya Zhang, Qing Yu
    Research Article

    When holding visual information temporarily in working memory (WM), the neural representation of the memorandum is distributed across various cortical regions, including visual and frontal cortices. However, the role of stimulus representation in visual and frontal cortices during WM has been controversial. Here, we tested the hypothesis that stimulus representation persists in the frontal cortex to facilitate flexible control demands in WM. During functional MRI, participants flexibly switched between simple WM maintenance of visual stimulus or more complex rule-based categorization of maintained stimulus on a trial-by-trial basis. Our results demonstrated enhanced stimulus representation in the frontal cortex that tracked demands for active WM control and enhanced stimulus representation in the visual cortex that tracked demands for precise WM maintenance. This differential frontal stimulus representation traded off with the newly-generated category representation with varying control demands. Simulation using multi-module recurrent neural networks replicated human neural patterns when stimulus information was preserved for network readout. Altogether, these findings help reconcile the long-standing debate in WM research, and provide empirical and computational evidence that flexible stimulus representation in the frontal cortex during WM serves as a potential neural coding scheme to accommodate the ever-changing environment.