Reexamination of N-terminal domains of Syntaxin-1 in vesicle fusion from central murine synapses

Abstract

Syntaxin-1 (STX1) and Munc18-1 are two requisite components of synaptic vesicular release machinery, so much so synaptic transmission cannot proceed in their absence. They form a tight complex through two major binding modes: through STX1's N-peptide and through STX's closed conformation driven by its Habc- domain. However, physiological roles of these two reportedly different binding modes in synapses are still controversial. Here we characterized the roles of STX1's N-peptide, Habc-domain, and open conformation with and without N-peptide deletion using our STX1-null mouse model system and exogenous reintroduction of STX1A mutants. We show, on the contrary to the general view, that the Habc-domain is absolutely required and N-peptide is dispensable for synaptic transmission. However, STX1A's N-peptide plays a regulatory role, particularly in the Ca2+-sensitivity and the short-term plasticity of vesicular release, whereas STX1's open-conformation governs the vesicle fusogenicity. Strikingly, we also show neurotransmitter release still proceeds when the two interaction modes between STX1A and Munc18-1 are presumably intervened, necessitating a refinement of the conceptualization of STX1A-Munc18-1 interaction.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. We uploaded source data files which show summary tables of mean, SEM, median, number of independent cultures, number of independent measurements, real p value for each test performed, and statistical test used for each separate figure.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Gülçin Vardar

    Institute of Neurophysiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
    For correspondence
    gulcinv@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Andrea Salazar-Lázaro

    Institute of Neurophysiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Marisa M Brockmann

    Institut für Neurophysiologie, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1386-5359
  4. Marion Weber-Boyvat

    Institute of Neurophysiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sina Zobel

    Institute of Neurophysiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Victor Wumbor-Apin Kumbol

    Einstein Center for Neurosciences Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Thorsten Trimbuch

    Department of Neurophysiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Christian Rosenmund

    Institut für Neurophysiologie, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
    For correspondence
    christian.rosenmund@charite.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3905-2444

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB958,TRR186)

  • Christian Rosenmund

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Reinhart Koselleck Projects)

  • Christian Rosenmund

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All procedures for animal maintenance and experiments were in accordance with the regulations of and approved by the animal welfare committee of Charité-Universitätsmedizin and the Berlin state government Agency for Health and Social Services under license number T0220/09. The generation of STX1-null mouse line was described previously (Arancillo et al. 2013, Vardar et al. 2016).

Copyright

© 2021, Vardar 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

  • 1,231
    views
  • 196
    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. Gülçin Vardar
  2. Andrea Salazar-Lázaro
  3. Marisa M Brockmann
  4. Marion Weber-Boyvat
  5. Sina Zobel
  6. Victor Wumbor-Apin Kumbol
  7. Thorsten Trimbuch
  8. Christian Rosenmund
(2021)
Reexamination of N-terminal domains of Syntaxin-1 in vesicle fusion from central murine synapses
eLife 10:e69498.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.69498

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.69498

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Mi-Seon Kong, Ethan Ancell ... Larry S Zweifel
    Research Article

    The central amygdala (CeA) has emerged as an important brain region for regulating both negative (fear and anxiety) and positive (reward) affective behaviors. The CeA has been proposed to encode affective information in the form of valence (whether the stimulus is good or bad) or salience (how significant is the stimulus), but the extent to which these two types of stimulus representation occur in the CeA is not known. Here, we used single cell calcium imaging in mice during appetitive and aversive conditioning and found that majority of CeA neurons (~65%) encode the valence of the unconditioned stimulus (US) with a smaller subset of cells (~15%) encoding the salience of the US. Valence and salience encoding of the conditioned stimulus (CS) was also observed, albeit to a lesser extent. These findings show that the CeA is a site of convergence for encoding oppositely valenced US information.

    1. Neuroscience
    Sharon Inberg, Yael Iosilevskii ... Benjamin Podbilewicz
    Research Article

    Dendrites are crucial for receiving information into neurons. Sensory experience affects the structure of these tree-like neurites, which, it is assumed, modifies neuronal function, yet the evidence is scarce, and the mechanisms are unknown. To study whether sensory experience affects dendritic morphology, we use the Caenorhabditis elegans' arborized nociceptor PVD neurons, under natural mechanical stimulation induced by physical contacts between individuals. We found that mechanosensory signals induced by conspecifics and by glass beads affect the dendritic structure of the PVD. Moreover, developmentally isolated animals show a decrease in their ability to respond to harsh touch. The structural and behavioral plasticity following sensory deprivation are functionally independent of each other and are mediated by an array of evolutionarily conserved mechanosensory amiloride-sensitive epithelial sodium channels (degenerins). Calcium imaging of the PVD neurons in a micromechanical device revealed that controlled mechanical stimulation of the body wall produces similar calcium dynamics in both isolated and crowded animals. Our genetic results, supported by optogenetic, behavioral, and pharmacological evidence, suggest an activity-dependent homeostatic mechanism for dendritic structural plasticity, that in parallel controls escape response to noxious mechanosensory stimuli.