1. Cell Biology
  2. Neuroscience
Download icon

Olfactory receptor accessory proteins play crucial roles in receptor function and gene choice

  1. Ruchira Sharma
  2. Yoshiro Ishimaru
  3. Ian G Davison
  4. Kentaro Ikegami
  5. Ming-Shan Chien
  6. Helena You
  7. Qiuyi Chi
  8. Momoka Kubota
  9. Masafumi Yohda
  10. Michael Ehlers
  11. Hiroaki Matsunami  Is a corresponding author
  1. Duke University Medical Center, United States
  2. Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Japan
Research Article
  • Cited 13
  • Views 2,854
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2017;6:e21895 doi: 10.7554/eLife.21895

Abstract

Each of the olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) chooses to express a single G protein-coupled olfactory receptor (OR) from a pool of hundreds. Here, we show the receptor transporting protein (RTP) family members play a dual role in both normal OR trafficking and determining OR gene choice probabilities. Rtp1 and Rtp2 double knockout mice (RTP1,2DKO) show OR trafficking defects and decreased OSN activation. Surprisingly, we discovered a small subset of the ORs are expressed in larger numbers of OSNs despite the presence of fewer total OSNs in RTP1,2DKO. Unlike typical ORs, some overrepresented ORs show robust cell surface expression in heterologous cells without the co-expression of RTPs. We present a model in which developing OSNs exhibit unstable OR expression until they choose to express an OR that exits the ER or undergo cell death. Our study sheds light on the new link between OR protein trafficking and OR transcriptional regulation.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ruchira Sharma

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2795-7457
  2. Yoshiro Ishimaru

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ian G Davison

    Department of Neurobiology, Duke University Medical Center, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0998-7676
  4. Kentaro Ikegami

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ming-Shan Chien

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Helena You

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Qiuyi Chi

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Momoka Kubota

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Masafumi Yohda

    Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Tokyo, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Michael Ehlers

    Department of Neurobiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Hiroaki Matsunami

    Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, United States
    For correspondence
    hiroaki.matsunami@duke.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8850-2608

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01 DC014423)

  • Hiroaki Matsunami

National Institutes of Health (R01 DC012095)

  • Hiroaki Matsunami

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) protocols (A161-16-07) of the Duke Animal Care and Use program.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Jeremy Nathans, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: September 28, 2016
  2. Accepted: February 16, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 6, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 22, 2017 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2017, Sharma 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

  • 2,854
    Page views
  • 595
    Downloads
  • 13
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

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)

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

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

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Medicine
    LouJin Song et al.
    Research Article Updated

    The lymphatic vasculature is involved in the pathogenesis of acute cardiac injuries, but little is known about its role in chronic cardiac dysfunction. Here, we demonstrate that angiotensin II infusion induced cardiac inflammation and fibrosis at 1 week and caused cardiac dysfunction and impaired lymphatic transport at 6 weeks in mice, while co-administration of VEGFCc156s improved these parameters. To identify novel mechanisms underlying this protection, RNA sequencing analysis in distinct cell populations revealed that VEGFCc156s specifically modulated angiotensin II-induced inflammatory responses in cardiac and peripheral lymphatic endothelial cells. Furthermore, telemetry studies showed that while angiotensin II increased blood pressure acutely in all animals, VEGFCc156s-treated animals displayed a delayed systemic reduction in blood pressure independent of alterations in angiotensin II-mediated aortic stiffness. Overall, these results demonstrate that VEGFCc156s had a multifaceted therapeutic effect to prevent angiotensin II-induced cardiac dysfunction by improving cardiac lymphatic function, alleviating fibrosis and inflammation, and ameliorating hypertension.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Na Li et al.
    Research Article

    Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) treatment increases heart function and decreases heart dilation after myocardial infarction (MI). Here, we investigated whether part of the cardioprotective effect of BNP in infarcted hearts related to improved neovascularisation. Infarcted mice were treated with saline or BNP for 10 days. BNP treatment increased vascularisation and the number of endothelial cells in all areas of infarcted hearts. Endothelial cell lineage tracing showed that BNP directly stimulated the proliferation of resident endothelial cells via NPR-A binding and p38 MAP kinase activation. BNP also stimulated the proliferation of WT1+ epicardium-derived cells but only in the hypoxic area of infarcted hearts. Our results demonstrated that these immature cells have a natural capacity to differentiate into endothelial cells in infarcted hearts. BNP treatment increased their proliferation but not their differentiation capacity. We identified new roles for BNP that hold potential for new therapeutic strategies to improve recovery and clinical outcome after MI.