Super-resolution imaging of synaptic and extra-synaptic AMPA receptors with different-sized fluorescent probes

  1. Sang Hak Lee
  2. Chaoyi Jin
  3. En Cai
  4. Pinghua Ge
  5. Yuji Ishitsuka
  6. Kai Wen Teng
  7. Andre A de Thomaz
  8. Duncan L Nall
  9. Murat Baday
  10. Okunola Jeyifous
  11. Daniel Demonte
  12. Christopher M Dundas
  13. Sheldon Park
  14. Jary Y Delgado
  15. William N Green
  16. Paul R Selvin  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States
  2. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  3. University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, United States
  4. University of Campinas, Brazil
  5. University of Chicago, United States
  6. State University of New York, United States
  7. University of Texas, United States

Abstract

Previous studies tracking AMPA receptor (AMPAR) diffusion at synapses observed a large mobile extrasynaptic AMPAR pool. Using super-resolution microscopy, we examined how fluorophore size and photostability affected AMPAR trafficking outside of, and within, post-synaptic densities (PSDs) from rats. Organic fluorescent dyes (≈4 nm), quantum dots, either small (≈10 nm diameter; sQDs) or big (>20 nm; bQDs), were coupled to AMPARs via different-sized linkers. We find that >90% of AMPARs labeled with fluorescent dyes or sQDs were diffusing in confined nanodomains in PSDs, which were stable for 15 minutes or longer. Less than 10% of sQD-AMPARs were extrasynaptic and highly mobile. In contrast, 5–10% of bQD-AMPARs were in PSDs and 90-95% were extrasynaptic as previously observed. Contrary to the hypothesis that AMPAR entry is limited by the occupancy of open PSD "slots", our findings suggest that AMPARs rapidly enter stable "nanodomains" in PSDs with lifetime ≥15 minutes, and do not accumulate in extrasynaptic membranes.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sang Hak Lee

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Chaoyi Jin

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. En Cai

    University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Pinghua Ge

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Yuji Ishitsuka

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kai Wen Teng

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Andre A de Thomaz

    Institute of Physics Gleb Wataghin"", University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Duncan L Nall

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Murat Baday

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Urbana, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Okunola Jeyifous

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Daniel Demonte

    Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, State University of New York, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Christopher M Dundas

    Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Sheldon Park

    Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, State University of New York, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Jary Y Delgado

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. William N Green

    Department of Neurobiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2167-1391
  16. Paul R Selvin

    Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, United States
    For correspondence
    selvin@illinois.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3658-4218

Funding

National Institutes of Health (NIH NS090903)

  • William N Green
  • Paul R Selvin

National Science Foundation (PHY-1430124)

  • Paul R Selvin

National Science Foundation (CBET-1264051)

  • Sheldon Park

National Institutes of Health (NIH NS100019)

  • William N Green
  • Paul R Selvin

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Primary hippocampal cultures were prepared from E18 rats according to UIUC guidelines. All rats were handled according to approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocols (#15254) of UIUC.

Copyright

© 2017, Lee 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

  • 7,304
    views
  • 1,225
    downloads
  • 60
    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. Sang Hak Lee
  2. Chaoyi Jin
  3. En Cai
  4. Pinghua Ge
  5. Yuji Ishitsuka
  6. Kai Wen Teng
  7. Andre A de Thomaz
  8. Duncan L Nall
  9. Murat Baday
  10. Okunola Jeyifous
  11. Daniel Demonte
  12. Christopher M Dundas
  13. Sheldon Park
  14. Jary Y Delgado
  15. William N Green
  16. Paul R Selvin
(2017)
Super-resolution imaging of synaptic and extra-synaptic AMPA receptors with different-sized fluorescent probes
eLife 6:e27744.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27744

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27744

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Johannes Elferich, Lingli Kong ... Nikolaus Grigorieff
    Research Advance

    Images taken by transmission electron microscopes are usually affected by lens aberrations and image defocus, among other factors. These distortions can be modeled in reciprocal space using the contrast transfer function (CTF). Accurate estimation and correction of the CTF is essential for restoring the high-resolution signal in cryogenic electron microscopy (cryoEM). Previously, we described the implementation of algorithms for this task in the cisTEM software package (Grant et al., 2018). Here we show that taking sample characteristics, such as thickness and tilt, into account can improve CTF estimation. This is particularly important when imaging cellular samples, where measurement of sample thickness and geometry derived from accurate modeling of the Thon ring pattern helps judging the quality of the sample. This improved CTF estimation has been implemented in CTFFIND5, a new version of the cisTEM program CTFFIND. We evaluated the accuracy of these estimates using images of tilted aquaporin crystals and eukaryotic cells thinned by focused ion beam milling. We estimate that with micrographs of sufficient quality CTFFIND5 can measure sample tilt with an accuracy of 3° and sample thickness with an accuracy of 5 nm.