A dual role for Cav1.4 Ca2+ channels in the molecular and structural organization of the rod photoreceptor synapse

  1. J Wesley Maddox
  2. Kate L Randall
  3. Ravi P Yadav
  4. Brittany Williams
  5. Jussara Hagen
  6. Paul J Derr
  7. Vasily Kerov
  8. Luca Della Santina
  9. Sheila A Baker
  10. Nikolai Artemyev
  11. Mrinalini Hoon
  12. Amy Lee  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Iowa, United States
  2. University of Wisconsin, Madison, United States
  3. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  4. University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Synapses are fundamental information processing units that rely on voltage-gated Ca2+ (Cav) channels to trigger Ca2+-dependent neurotransmitter release. Cav channels also play Ca2+-independent roles in other biological contexts, but whether they do so in axon terminals is unknown. Here, we addressed this unknown with respect to the requirement for Cav1.4 L-type channels for the formation of rod photoreceptor synapses in the retina. Using a mouse strain expressing a non-conducting mutant form of Cav1.4, we report that the Cav1.4 protein, but not its Ca2+ conductance, is required for the molecular assembly of rod synapses; however, Cav1.4 Ca2+ signals are needed for the appropriate recruitment of postsynaptic partners. Our results support a model in which presynaptic Cav channels serve both as organizers of synaptic building blocks and as sources of Ca2+ ions in building the first synapse of the visual pathway and perhaps more broadly in the nervous system.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files

Article and author information

Author details

  1. J Wesley Maddox

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Kate L Randall

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ravi P Yadav

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Brittany Williams

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jussara Hagen

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Paul J Derr

    Neuroscience, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Vasily Kerov

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Luca Della Santina

    Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sheila A Baker

    Biochemistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Nikolai Artemyev

    Molecular Physiology, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Mrinalini Hoon

    Department of Neuroscience, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Madison, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Amy Lee

    Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    For correspondence
    amy-lee@uiowa.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8021-0443

Funding

National Eye Institute (EY 026817)

  • Amy Lee

McPherson Eye Research Institute

  • Mrinalini Hoon

Research to Prevent Blindness

  • Mrinalini Hoon

National Eye Institute (EY 029953)

  • J Wesley Maddox

National Eye Institute (EY 026477)

  • Brittany Williams

National Eye Institute (EY010843,EY012682)

  • Nikolai Artemyev

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 (#7121262-025) of the University of Iowa. The protocol was approved by the Office of Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of Iowa (A3021-01).

Copyright

© 2020, Maddox 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

  • 2,196
    views
  • 363
    downloads
  • 30
    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. J Wesley Maddox
  2. Kate L Randall
  3. Ravi P Yadav
  4. Brittany Williams
  5. Jussara Hagen
  6. Paul J Derr
  7. Vasily Kerov
  8. Luca Della Santina
  9. Sheila A Baker
  10. Nikolai Artemyev
  11. Mrinalini Hoon
  12. Amy Lee
(2020)
A dual role for Cav1.4 Ca2+ channels in the molecular and structural organization of the rod photoreceptor synapse
eLife 9:e62184.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62184

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62184

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Bharath Chandra Talluri, Hendrikje Nienborg
    Insight

    Measuring the activity of hundreds of neurons in macaque brains simultaneously provides further evidence that drift-diffusion dynamics underlie how decisions are made in the brain.

    1. Neuroscience
    Nadine Herzog, Hendrik Hartmann ... Annette Horstmann
    Research Article

    Everyday life requires an adaptive balance between distraction-resistant maintenance of information and the flexibility to update this information when needed. These opposing mechanisms are proposed to be balanced through a working memory gating mechanism. Prior research indicates that obesity may elevate the risk of working memory deficits, yet the underlying mechanisms remain elusive. Dopaminergic alterations have emerged as a potential mediator. However, current models suggest these alterations should only shift the balance in working memory tasks, not produce overall deficits. The empirical support for this notion is currently lacking, however. To address this gap, we pooled data from three studies (N = 320) where participants performed a working memory gating task. Higher BMI was associated with overall poorer working memory, irrespective of whether there was a need to maintain or update information. However, when participants, in addition to BMI level, were categorized based on certain putative dopamine-signaling characteristics (single-nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]; specifically, Taq1A and DARPP-32), distinct working memory gating effects emerged. These SNPs, primarily associated with striatal dopamine transmission, appear to be linked with differences in updating, specifically, among high-BMI individuals. Moreover, blood amino acid ratio, which indicates central dopamine synthesis capacity, combined with BMI shifted the balance between distractor-resistant maintenance and updating. These findings suggest that both dopamine-dependent and dopamine-independent cognitive effects exist in obesity. Understanding these effects is crucial if we aim to modify maladaptive cognitive profiles in individuals with obesity.