APP and APLP2 interact with the synaptic release machinery and facilitate transmitter release at hippocampal synapses

  1. Tomas Fanutza
  2. Dolores Del Prete
  3. Michael J Ford
  4. Pablo E Castillo
  5. Luciano D'Adamio  Is a corresponding author
  1. Albert Einstein College of Medicine, United States
  2. MS Bioworks, LLC, United States

Abstract

The Amyloid precursor protein (APP), whose mutations cause familial Alzheimer's disease, interacts with the synaptic release machinery suggesting a role in neurotransmission. Here we mapped this interaction to the NH2-terminal region of the APP intracellular domain. A peptide encompassing this binding domain -named JCasp- is naturally produced by a γ-secretase/caspase double-cut of APP. JCasp interferes with the APP-presynaptic proteins interaction and, if linked to a cell-penetrating peptide, reduces glutamate release in acute hippocampal slices from wild-type but not APP deficient mice, indicating that JCasp inhibits APP function. The APP-like protein-2 (APLP2) also binds the synaptic release machinery. Deletion of APP and APLP2 produces synaptic deficits similar to those caused by JCasp. Our data support the notion that APP and APLP2 facilitate transmitter release, likely through the interaction with the neurotransmitter release machinery. Given the link of APP to Alzheimer's disease, alterations of this synaptic role of APP could contribute to dementia.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tomas Fanutza

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Dolores Del Prete

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Michael J Ford

    MS Bioworks, LLC, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Pablo E Castillo

    Dominick P. Purpura Department of Neuroscience, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Luciano D'Adamio

    Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    luciano.dadamio@einstein.yu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Bart De Strooper, VIB Center for the Biology of Disease, KU Leuven, Belgium

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to approved institutional animal care and use committee(IACUC) at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in animal protocol number 20130509. All surgery was performed under sodium pentobarbital anesthesia, and every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Version history

  1. Received: June 29, 2015
  2. Accepted: November 8, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 9, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: November 10, 2015 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: February 3, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2015, Fanutza et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,394
    views
  • 682
    downloads
  • 73
    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. Tomas Fanutza
  2. Dolores Del Prete
  3. Michael J Ford
  4. Pablo E Castillo
  5. Luciano D'Adamio
(2015)
APP and APLP2 interact with the synaptic release machinery and facilitate transmitter release at hippocampal synapses
eLife 4:e09743.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09743

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09743

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Anja T Zai, Anna E Stepien ... Richard HR Hahnloser
    Research Article

    Songbirds’ vocal mastery is impressive, but to what extent is it a result of practice? Can they, based on experienced mismatch with a known target, plan the necessary changes to recover the target in a practice-free manner without intermittently singing? In adult zebra finches, we drive the pitch of a song syllable away from its stable (baseline) variant acquired from a tutor, then we withdraw reinforcement and subsequently deprive them of singing experience by muting or deafening. In this deprived state, birds do not recover their baseline song. However, they revert their songs toward the target by about 1 standard deviation of their recent practice, provided the sensory feedback during the latter signaled a pitch mismatch with the target. Thus, targeted vocal plasticity does not require immediate sensory experience, showing that zebra finches are capable of goal-directed vocal planning.

    1. Neuroscience
    Amanda Chu, Nicholas T Gordon ... Michael A McDannald
    Research Article Updated

    Pavlovian fear conditioning has been extensively used to study the behavioral and neural basis of defensive systems. In a typical procedure, a cue is paired with foot shock, and subsequent cue presentation elicits freezing, a behavior theoretically linked to predator detection. Studies have since shown a fear conditioned cue can elicit locomotion, a behavior that – in addition to jumping, and rearing – is theoretically linked to imminent or occurring predation. A criticism of studies observing fear conditioned cue-elicited locomotion is that responding is non-associative. We gave rats Pavlovian fear discrimination over a baseline of reward seeking. TTL-triggered cameras captured 5 behavior frames/s around cue presentation. Experiment 1 examined the emergence of danger-specific behaviors over fear acquisition. Experiment 2 examined the expression of danger-specific behaviors in fear extinction. In total, we scored 112,000 frames for nine discrete behavior categories. Temporal ethograms show that during acquisition, a fear conditioned cue suppresses reward seeking and elicits freezing, but also elicits locomotion, jumping, and rearing – all of which are maximal when foot shock is imminent. During extinction, a fear conditioned cue most prominently suppresses reward seeking, and elicits locomotion that is timed to shock delivery. The independent expression of these behaviors in both experiments reveals a fear conditioned cue to orchestrate a temporally organized suite of behaviors.