A model for regulation by SynGAP-α1 of binding of synaptic proteins to PDZ-domain 'Slots' in the postsynaptic density

Abstract

SynGAP is a Ras/Rap GTPase-activating protein (GAP) that is a major constituent of postsynaptic densities (PSDs) from mammalian forebrain. Its α1 isoform binds to all three PDZ (PSD-95, Discs-large, ZO-1) domains of PSD-95, the principal PSD scaffold, and can occupy as many as 15% of these PDZ domains. We present evidence that synGAP-α1 regulates the composition of the PSD by restricting binding to the PDZ domains of PSD-95. We show that phosphorylation by Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII) and Polo-like kinase-2 (PLK2) decreases its affinity for the PDZ domains by several fold, which would free PDZ domains for occupancy by other proteins. Finally, we show that three critical postsynaptic signaling proteins that bind to the PDZ domains of PSD-95 are present in higher concentration in PSDs isolated from mice with a heterozygous deletion of synGAP.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ward G Walkup

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Tara L Mastro

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Leslie T Schenker

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Jost Vielmetter

    Beckman Institute Protein Expression Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Rebecca Hu

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Ariella Iancu

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Meera Reghunathan

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Barry Dylan Bannon

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Mary B Kennedy

    Division of Biology and Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    For correspondence
    kennedym@its.caltech.edu
    Competing interests
    Mary B Kennedy, Reviewing Editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1369-0525

Funding

National Science Foundation (2006019582)

  • Ward G Walkup

National Institutes of Health (NRSA T32 GM07616)

  • Ward G Walkup

Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (Center for Integrative Study of Cell Regulation)

  • Mary B Kennedy

Hicks Foundation

  • Mary B Kennedy

Allen and Lenabelle Davis Foundation (Endowed Chair)

  • Mary B Kennedy

National Institutes of Health (MH095095)

  • Mary B Kennedy

The Beckman Institute (Protein Expression Center)

  • Jost Vielmetter

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

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) protocol (#1034-15G) of the California Institute of Technology.

Copyright

© 2016, Walkup 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

  • 4,228
    views
  • 798
    downloads
  • 46
    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. Ward G Walkup
  2. Tara L Mastro
  3. Leslie T Schenker
  4. Jost Vielmetter
  5. Rebecca Hu
  6. Ariella Iancu
  7. Meera Reghunathan
  8. Barry Dylan Bannon
  9. Mary B Kennedy
(2016)
A model for regulation by SynGAP-α1 of binding of synaptic proteins to PDZ-domain 'Slots' in the postsynaptic density
eLife 5:e16813.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16813

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16813

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Shraddha KC, Kenny H Nguyen ... Thomas C Boothby
    Research Article

    The conformational ensemble and function of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are sensitive to their solution environment. The inherent malleability of disordered proteins, combined with the exposure of their residues, accounts for this sensitivity. One context in which IDPs play important roles that are concomitant with massive changes to the intracellular environment is during desiccation (extreme drying). The ability of organisms to survive desiccation has long been linked to the accumulation of high levels of cosolutes such as trehalose or sucrose as well as the enrichment of IDPs, such as late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) proteins or cytoplasmic abundant heat-soluble (CAHS) proteins. Despite knowing that IDPs play important roles and are co-enriched alongside endogenous, species-specific cosolutes during desiccation, little is known mechanistically about how IDP-cosolute interactions influence desiccation tolerance. Here, we test the notion that the protective function of desiccation-related IDPs is enhanced through conformational changes induced by endogenous cosolutes. We find that desiccation-related IDPs derived from four different organisms spanning two LEA protein families and the CAHS protein family synergize best with endogenous cosolutes during drying to promote desiccation protection. Yet the structural parameters of protective IDPs do not correlate with synergy for either CAHS or LEA proteins. We further demonstrate that for CAHS, but not LEA proteins, synergy is related to self-assembly and the formation of a gel. Our results suggest that functional synergy between IDPs and endogenous cosolutes is a convergent desiccation protection strategy seen among different IDP families and organisms, yet the mechanisms underlying this synergy differ between IDP families.