Antinociceptive modulation by the adhesion GPCR CIRL promotes mechanosensory signal discrimination

  1. Sven Dannhäuser
  2. Thomas J Lux
  3. Chun Hu
  4. Mareike Selcho
  5. Jeremy T-C Chen
  6. Nadine Ehmann
  7. Divya Sachidanandan
  8. Sarah Stopp
  9. Dennis Pauls
  10. Matthias Pawlak
  11. Tobias Langenhan
  12. Peter Soba
  13. Heike L Rittner  Is a corresponding author
  14. Robert J Kittel  Is a corresponding author
  1. Leipzig University, Germany
  2. University Hospital Würzburg, Germany
  3. University of Hamburg, Germany
  4. University of Würzburg, Germany
  5. University Hopsitals of Wuerzburg, Germany

Abstract

Adhesion-type GPCRs (aGPCRs) participate in a vast range of physiological processes. Their frequent association with mechanosensitive functions suggests that processing of mechanical stimuli may be a common feature of this receptor family. Previously, we reported that the Drosophila aGPCR CIRL sensitizes sensory responses to gentle touch and sound by amplifying signal transduction in low-threshold mechanoreceptors (Scholz et al., 2017). Here, we show that Cirl is also expressed in high-threshold mechanical nociceptors where it adjusts nocifensive behaviour under physiological and pathological conditions. Optogenetic in vivo experiments indicate that CIRL lowers cAMP levels in both mechanosensory submodalities. However, contrasting its role in touch-sensitive neurons, CIRL dampens the response of nociceptors to mechanical stimulation. Consistent with this finding, rat nociceptors display decreased Cirl1 expression during allodynia. Thus, cAMP-downregulation by CIRL exerts opposing effects on low-threshold mechanosensors and high-threshold nociceptors. This intriguing bipolar action facilitates the separation of mechanosensory signals carrying different physiological information.

Data availability

The presented data are summarized in Tables 1-3.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sven Dannhäuser

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Thomas J Lux

    Center for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1049-9872
  3. Chun Hu

    Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University Medical Campus, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Mareike Selcho

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jeremy T-C Chen

    Center for Interdisciplinary Pain Medicine, Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Nadine Ehmann

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Divya Sachidanandan

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8219-8177
  8. Sarah Stopp

    Department of Animal Physiology, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Dennis Pauls

    Department of Animal Physiology, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Matthias Pawlak

    Department of Neurophysiology, Institute of Physiology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Tobias Langenhan

    Rudolf-Schönheimer-Institute of Biochemistry, Division of General Biochemistry, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9061-3809
  12. Peter Soba

    Center for Molecular Neurobiology, University Medical Campus, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Heike L Rittner

    Anesthsiology, University Hopsitals of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
    For correspondence
    rittner_h@ukw.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Robert J Kittel

    Institute of Biology, Department of Animal Physiology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
    For correspondence
    rjkittel@me.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9199-4826

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (PA3241/2-1)

  • Mareike Selcho

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (RI817/13-1)

  • Heike L Rittner

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (FOR 2149/P03,TRR 166/B04,KI1460/4-1,KI1460/5-1)

  • Robert J Kittel

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SPP 1926/SO1337/2-2,SO1337/4-1)

  • Peter Soba

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (FOR 2149/P01 and P03)

  • Tobias Langenhan

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animal care and protocols were performed in accordance with international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals (EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments) and were approved by the Government of Unterfranken (protocol numbers 2-733 and 2-264).

Copyright

© 2020, Dannhäuser 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

  • 2,074
    views
  • 292
    downloads
  • 19
    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. Sven Dannhäuser
  2. Thomas J Lux
  3. Chun Hu
  4. Mareike Selcho
  5. Jeremy T-C Chen
  6. Nadine Ehmann
  7. Divya Sachidanandan
  8. Sarah Stopp
  9. Dennis Pauls
  10. Matthias Pawlak
  11. Tobias Langenhan
  12. Peter Soba
  13. Heike L Rittner
  14. Robert J Kittel
(2020)
Antinociceptive modulation by the adhesion GPCR CIRL promotes mechanosensory signal discrimination
eLife 9:e56738.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56738

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.56738

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Katie Morris, Edita Bulovaite ... Mathew H Horrocks
    Research Article

    The concept that dimeric protein complexes in synapses can sequentially replace their subunits has been a cornerstone of Francis Crick’s 1984 hypothesis, explaining how long-term memories could be maintained in the face of short protein lifetimes. However, it is unknown whether the subunits of protein complexes that mediate memory are sequentially replaced in the brain and if this process is linked to protein lifetime. We address these issues by focusing on supercomplexes assembled by the abundant postsynaptic scaffolding protein PSD95, which plays a crucial role in memory. We used single-molecule detection, super-resolution microscopy and MINFLUX to probe the molecular composition of PSD95 supercomplexes in mice carrying genetically encoded HaloTags, eGFP, and mEoS2. We found a population of PSD95-containing supercomplexes comprised of two copies of PSD95, with a dominant 12.7 nm separation. Time-stamping of PSD95 subunits in vivo revealed that each PSD95 subunit was sequentially replaced over days and weeks. Comparison of brain regions showed subunit replacement was slowest in the cortex, where PSD95 protein lifetime is longest. Our findings reveal that protein supercomplexes within the postsynaptic density can be maintained by gradual replacement of individual subunits providing a mechanism for stable maintenance of their organization. Moreover, we extend Crick’s model by suggesting that synapses with slow subunit replacement of protein supercomplexes and long-protein lifetimes are specialized for long-term memory storage and that these synapses are highly enriched in superficial layers of the cortex where long-term memories are stored.

    1. Neuroscience
    John P Grogan, Matthias Raemaekers ... Sanjay G Manohar
    Research Article

    Motivation depends on dopamine, but might be modulated by acetylcholine which influences dopamine release in the striatum, and amplifies motivation in animal studies. A corresponding effect in humans would be important clinically, since anticholinergic drugs are frequently used in Parkinson’s disease, a condition that can also disrupt motivation. Reward and dopamine make us more ready to respond, as indexed by reaction times (RT), and move faster, sometimes termed vigour. These effects may be controlled by preparatory processes that can be tracked using electroencephalography (EEG). We measured vigour in a placebo-controlled, double-blinded study of trihexyphenidyl (THP), a muscarinic antagonist, with an incentivised eye movement task and EEG. Participants responded faster and with greater vigour when incentives were high, but THP blunted these motivational effects, suggesting that muscarinic receptors facilitate invigoration by reward. Preparatory EEG build-up (contingent negative variation [CNV]) was strengthened by high incentives and by muscarinic blockade, although THP reduced the incentive effect. The amplitude of preparatory activity predicted both vigour and RT, although over distinct scalp regions; frontal activity predicted vigour, whereas a larger, earlier, central component predicted RT. The incentivisation of RT was partly mediated by the CNV, though vigour was not. Moreover, the CNV mediated the drug’s effect on dampening incentives, suggesting that muscarinic receptors underlie the motivational influence on this preparatory activity. Taken together, these findings show that a muscarinic blocker impairs motivated action in healthy people, and that medial frontal preparatory neural activity mediates this for RT.