Molecular and organizational diversity intersect to generate functional synaptic heterogeneity within and between excitatory neuronal subtypes

  1. Neuroscience Graduate Training Program, Brown University, Providence, RI
  2. Department of Neuroscience, Brown University, Providence, RI
  3. Carney Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, RI

Peer review process

Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, public reviews, and a provisional response from the authors.

Read more about eLife’s peer review process.

Editors

  • Reviewing Editor
    Hugo Bellen
    Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States of America
  • Senior Editor
    Claude Desplan
    New York University, New York, United States of America

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Calcium channels are key regulators of synaptic strength and plasticity, yet how these channels are differentially utilized to enable synaptic diversity is not clear. In this manuscript, the authors use new endogenous tagging of the Drosophila CaV2 channel Cac and three auxiliary subunits to investigate distinct calcium channel functions at two motor neuron subtypes at the fly NMJ, Is and Ib. Although it is clear from previous studies that Pr is higher at Is over Ib, it is not clear why. The authors confirm these differences using postsynaptic calcium imaging combined with post-hoc Cac-TdTomato imaging. Then, through a series of confocal and super resolution imaging studies, the authors describe differences in calcium channel and active zone structure between Is and Ib motor neuron terminals, and the role of Brp and homeostatic plasticity in regulating channel abundance. Finally, the authors show that while the CaBeta subunit is present at similar levels at Is and Ib active zones, there is an interesting reduction in Stj at Is active zones. The authors conclude that these differences in active zone structure and architecture contribute to the generation of the observed heterogeneity in synaptic strength.

Overall the manuscript is well written, and the successful generation of the new endogenous Cac tags (Td-Tomato, Halo) and CaBeta, stj, and stolid genes with V5 tags will be powerful reagents for the field to enable new studies on calcium channels in synaptic structure, function, and plasticity. There are also some interesting, though not entirely unexpected, findings regarding how Brp and homeostatic plasticity modulate calcium channel abundance. However, a major concern is that the conclusions about how "molecular and organization diversity generate functional synaptic heterogeneity" are not really supported by the data presented in this study. In particular, the key fact that frames this study is that Cac levels are similar at Ib and Is active zones, but that Pr is higher at Is over Ib (which was previously known). While Pr can be influenced by myriad processes, the authors should have first assessed presynaptic calcium influx - if they had, they would have better framed the key questions in this study. As the authors reference from previous studies, calcium influx is at least two-fold higher per active zone at Is over Ib, and the authors likely know that this difference is more than sufficient to explain the difference in Pr at Is over Ib. Hence, there is no reason to invoke differences in "molecular and organization diversity" to explain the difference in Pr, and the authors offer no data to support that the differences in active zone structure at Is vs Ib are necessary for the differences in Pr. Indeed, the real question the authors should have investigated is why there are such differences in presynaptic calcium influx at Is over Ib despite having similar levels/abundance of Cac. This seems the real question, and is all that is needed to explain the Pr differences shown in Fig. 1. The other changes in active zone structure and organization at Is vs Ib may very well contribute to additional differences in Pr, but the authors have not shown this in the present study, and rely on other studies (such as calcium-SV coupling at Is vs Ib) to support an argument that is not necessitated by their data. At the end of this manuscript, the authors have found an interesting possibility that Stj levels are reduced at Is vs Ib, that might perhaps contribute to the difference in calcium influx. However, at present this remains speculative.

Overall, the authors have generated powerful reagents for the field to study calcium channels and how they are regulated, but draw conclusions about active zone structure and organization contributing to functional heterogeneity that are not strongly supported by the data presented.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors aim to investigate how voltage-gated calcium channel number, organization, and subunit composition lead to changes in synaptic activity at tonic and phasic motor neuron terminals, or type Is and Ib motor neurons in Drosophila. These neuron subtypes generate widely different physiological outputs, and many investigations have sought to understand the molecular underpinnings responsible for these differences. Additionally, these authors explore not only static differences that exist during the third-instar larval stage of development but also use a pharmacological approach to induce homeostatic plasticity to explore how these neuronal subtypes dynamically change the structural composition and organization of key synaptic proteins contributing to physiological plasticity. The Drosophila neuromuscular junction (NMJ) is glutamatergic, the main excitatory neurotransmitter in the human brain, so these findings not only expand our understanding of the molecular and physiological mechanisms responsible for differences in motor neuron subtype activity but also contribute to our understanding of how the human brain and nervous system functions.

The authors employ state-of-the-art tools and techniques such as single-molecule localization microscopy 3D STORM and create several novel transgenic animals using CRISPR to expand the molecular tools available for exploration of synaptic biology that will be of wide interest to the field. Additionally, the authors use a robust set of experimental approaches from active zone level resolution functional imaging from live preparations to electrophysiology and immunohistochemical analyses to explore and test their hypotheses. All data appear to be robustly acquired and analyzed using appropriate methodology. The authors make important advancements to our understanding of how the different motor neuron subtypes, phasic and tonic-like, exhibit widely varying electrical output despite the neuromuscular junctions having similar ultrastructural composition in the proteins of interest, voltage gated calcium channel cacophony (cac) and the scaffold protein Bruchpilot (brp). The authors reveal the ratio of brp:cac appears to be a critical determinant of release probability (Pr), and in particular, the packing density of VGCCs and availability of brp. Importantly, the authors demonstrate a brp-dependent increase in VGCC density following acute philanthotoxin perfusion (glutamate receptor inhibitor). This VGCC increase appears to be largely responsible for the presynaptic homeostatic plasticity (PHP) observable at the Drosophila NMJ. Lastly, the authors created several novel CRISPR-tagged transgenic lines to visualize the spatial localization of VGCC subunits in Drosophila. Two of these lines, CaBV5-C and stjV5-N, express in motor neurons and in the nervous system, localize at the NMJ, and most strikingly, strongly correlate with Pr at tonic and phasic-like terminals.

The few limitations in this study could be addressed with some commentary, a few minor follow-up analyses, or experiments. The authors use a postsynaptically expressed calcium indicator (mhc-Gal4>UAS -GCaMP) to calculate Pr, yet do not explore the contribution that glutamate receptors, or other postsynaptic contributors (e.g. components of the postsynaptic density, PSD) may contribute. A previous publication exploring tonic vs phasic-like activity at the drosophila NMJ revealed a dynamic role for GluRII (Aponte-Santiago et al, 2020). Could the speed of GluR accumulation account for differences between neuron subtypes?

The observation that calcium channel density and brp:cac ratio as a critical determinant of Pr is an important one. However, it is surprising that this was not observed in previous investigations of cac intensity (of which there are many). Is this purely a technical limitation of other investigations, or are other possibilities feasible? Additionally, regarding VGCC-SV coupling, the authors conclude that this packing density increases their proximity to SVs and contributes to the steeper relationship between VGCCs and Pr at phasic type Is. Is it possible that brp or other AZ components could account for these differences. The authors possess the tools to address this directly by labeling vesicles with JanellaFluor646; a stronger signal should be present at Is boutons. Additionally, many different studies have used transmission electron microscopy to explore SVs location to AZs (t-bars) at the Drosophila NMJ.

In reference to the contradictory observations that VGCC intensity does not always correlate with, or determine Pr. Previous investigations have also observed other AZ proteins or interactors (e.g. synaptotagmin mutants) critically control release, even when the correlation between cac and release remains constant while Pr dramatically precipitates.

To confirm the observations that lower brp levels results in a significantly higher cac:brp ratio at phasic-like synapses by organizing VGCCs; this argument could be made stronger by analyzing their existing data. By selecting a population of AZs in Ib boutons that endogenously express normal cac and lower brp levels, the Pr from these should be higher than those from within that population, but comparable to Is Pr. I believe the authors should also be able to correlate the cac:brp ratio with Pr from their data set generally; to determine if a strong correlation exists beyond their observation for cac correlation.

For the philanthotoxin induced changes in cac and brp localization underlying PHP, why do the authors not show cac accumulation after PhTx on live dissected preparations (i.e. in real time)? This also be an excellent opportunity to validate their brp:cac theory. Do the authors observe a dynamic change in brp:cac after 1, or 5 minutes; do Is boutons potentiate stronger due to proportional increases in cac and brp? Also regarding PhTx-induced PHP, their observations that stj and α2δ-3are more abundant at Is synapses, suggests that they may also play a role in PhTx induced changes in cac. If either/both are overexpressed during PhTx, brp should increase while cac remains constant. These accessory proteins may determine cac incorporation at AZs.
Taken together this study generates important data-driven, conceptional, and theoretical advancements in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of different motor neurons, and our understanding of synaptic biology generally. The data are robust, thoroughly analyzed, appropriately depicted. This study not only generates novel findings but also generated novel molecular tools which will aid future investigations and investigators progress in this field.

Author Response:

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

[...] Overall the manuscript is well written, and the successful generation of the new endogenous Cac tags (Td-Tomato, Halo) and CaBeta, stj, and stolid genes with V5 tags will be powerful reagents for the field to enable new studies on calcium channels in synaptic structure, function, and plasticity. There are also some interesting, though not entirely unexpected, findings regarding how Brp and homeostatic plasticity modulate calcium channel abundance. However, a major concern is that the conclusions about how "molecular and organization diversity generate functional synaptic heterogeneity" are not really supported by the data presented in this study. In particular, the key fact that frames this study is that Cac levels are similar at Ib and Is active zones, but that Pr is higher at Is over Ib (which was previously known). While Pr can be influenced by myriad processes, the authors should have first assessed presynaptic calcium influx - if they had, they would have better framed the key questions in this study. As the authors reference from previous studies, calcium influx is at least two-fold higher per active zone at Is over Ib, and the authors likely know that this difference is more than sufficient to explain the difference in Pr at Is over Ib. Hence, there is no reason to invoke differences in "molecular and organization diversity" to explain the difference in Pr, and the authors offer no data to support that the differences in active zone structure at Is vs Ib are necessary for the differences in Pr. Indeed, the real question the authors should have investigated is why there are such differences in presynaptic calcium influx at Is over Ib despite having similar levels/abundance of Cac. This seems the real question, and is all that is needed to explain the Pr differences shown in Fig. 1. The other changes in active zone structure and organization at Is vs Ib may very well contribute to additional differences in Pr, but the authors have not shown this in the present study, and rely on other studies (such as calcium-SV coupling at Is vs Ib) to support an argument that is not necessitated by their data. At the end of this manuscript, the authors have found an interesting possibility that Stj levels are reduced at Is vs Ib, that might perhaps contribute to the difference in calcium influx. However, at present this remains speculative.

Overall, the authors have generated powerful reagents for the field to study calcium channels and how they are regulated, but draw conclusions about active zone structure and organization contributing to functional heterogeneity that are not strongly supported by the data presented.

Reviewer 1 raises an interesting question that we agree will form the basis of important studies. Here, we set out to address a different question, which we will work to better frame. While we and others had previously found a strong correlation between calcium channel abundance and synaptic release probability (Pr (Akbergenova et al., 2018; Gratz et al., 2019; Holderith et al., 2012; Nakamura et al., 2015; Sheng et al., 2012)), more recent studies found that calcium channel abundance does not necessarily predict synaptic strength (Aldahabi et al., 2022; Rebola et al., 2019). Our study explores this paradox and presents findings that provide an explanation: calcium channel abundance predicts Pr among individual synapses of either low-Pr type-Ib or high-Pr type-Is inputs where modulating channel number tunes synaptic strength, but does not predict Pr between the two inputs, indicating an inputspecific role for calcium channel abundance in promoting synaptic strength. Thus, we propose that calcium channel abundance predictably modulates synaptic strength among individual synapses of a single input or synapse subtype, which share similar molecular and spatial organization, but not between distinct inputs where the underlying organization of active zones differs. Consistently, in the mouse, calcium channel abundance correlates strongly with release probability specifically when assessed among homogeneous populations of connections (Aldahabi et al., 2022; Holderith et al., 2012; Nakamura et al., 2015; Rebola et al., 2019; Sheng et al., 2012).

As Reviewer 1 notes, the two-fold difference in calcium influx at type-Is synapses is certainly an important difference underlying three-fold higher Pr. However, growing evidence indicates that calcium influx alone, like calcium channel abundance, does not reliably predict synaptic strength between inputs. For example, Rebola et al. (2019) compared cerebellar synapses formed by granule and stellate cells and found that lower Pr granule synapses exhibit both higher calcium channel abundance and calcium influx. In another example, Aldahabi et al. (2023) demonstrate that even when calcium influx is greater at high-Pr synapses, it does not necessarily explain differences in synaptic strength between inputs. Studying excitatory hippocampal CA1 synapses onto distinct interneuronal targets, they found that raising calcium entry at low-Pr inputs to high-Pr synapse levels is not sufficient to increase synaptic strength to high-Pr synapse levels. Similarly, at the Drosophila NMJ, the finding that type-Ib synapses exhibit loose calcium channel-synaptic vesicle coupling whereas type-Is synapses exhibit tight coupling suggests factors beyond calcium influx also contribute to differences in Pr between the two inputs (He et al., 2023). Consistently, a two-fold increase in external calcium does not induce a three-fold increase in release at low-Pr type-Ib synapses (He et al., 2023). Thus, upon finding that calcium channel abundance is similar at type-Ib and -Is synapses, we focused on identifying differences beyond calcium channel abundance and calcium influx that might contribute their distinct synaptic strengths. We agree that these studies, ours included, cannot definitively determine the contribution of identified organizational differences to distinct release probabilities because it is not currently possible to specifically alter subsynaptic organization, and will ensure that our language is tempered accordingly. However, in addition to the studies cited above and our findings, recent work demonstrating that homeostatic potentiation of neurotransmitter release is accompanied by greater spatial compaction of multiple active zone proteins (Dannhauser et al., 2022; Mrestani et al., 2021) and decreased calcium channel mobility (Ghelani et al., 2023) provide support for the interpretation that subsynaptic organization is a key parameter for modulating Pr.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

The authors aim to investigate how voltage-gated calcium channel number, organization, and subunit composition lead to changes in synaptic activity at tonic and phasic motor neuron terminals, or type Is and Ib motor neurons in Drosophila. These neuron subtypes generate widely different physiological outputs, and many investigations have sought to understand the molecular underpinnings responsible for these differences. Additionally, these authors explore not only static differences that exist during the third-instar larval stage of development but also use a pharmacological approach to induce homeostatic plasticity to explore how these neuronal subtypes dynamically change the structural composition and organization of key synaptic proteins contributing to physiological plasticity. The Drosophila neuromuscular junction (NMJ) is glutamatergic, the main excitatory neurotransmitter in the human brain, so these findings not only expand our understanding of the molecular and physiological mechanisms responsible for differences in motor neuron subtype activity but also contribute to our understanding of how the human brain and nervous system functions.

The authors employ state-of-the-art tools and techniques such as single-molecule localization microscopy 3D STORM and create several novel transgenic animals using CRISPR to expand the molecular tools available for exploration of synaptic biology that will be of wide interest to the field. Additionally, the authors use a robust set of experimental approaches from active zone level resolution functional imaging from live preparations to electrophysiology and immunohistochemical analyses to explore and test their hypotheses. All data appear to be robustly acquired and analyzed using appropriate methodology. The authors make important advancements to our understanding of how the different motor neuron subtypes, phasic and tonic-like, exhibit widely varying electrical output despite the neuromuscular junctions having similar ultrastructural composition in the proteins of interest, voltage gated calcium channel cacophony (cac) and the scaffold protein Bruchpilot (brp). The authors reveal the ratio of brp:cac appears to be a critical determinant of release probability (Pr), and in particular, the packing density of VGCCs and availability of brp. Importantly, the authors demonstrate a brp-dependent increase in VGCC density following acute philanthotoxin perfusion (glutamate receptor inhibitor). This VGCC increase appears to be largely responsible for the presynaptic homeostatic plasticity (PHP) observable at the Drosophila NMJ. Lastly, the authors created several novel CRISPRtagged transgenic lines to visualize the spatial localization of VGCC subunits in Drosophila. Two of these lines, CaBV5-C and stjV5-N, express in motor neurons and in the nervous system, localize at the NMJ, and most strikingly, strongly correlate with Pr at tonic and phasic-like terminals.

  1. The few limitations in this study could be addressed with some commentary, a few minor follow-up analyses, or experiments. The authors use a postsynaptically expressed calcium indicator (mhcGal4>UAS -GCaMP) to calculate Pr, yet do not explore the contribution that glutamate receptors, or other postsynaptic contributors (e.g. components of the postsynaptic density, PSD) may contribute. A previous publication exploring tonic vs phasic-like activity at the drosophila NMJ revealed a dynamic role for GluRII (Aponte-Santiago et al, 2020). Could the speed of GluR accumulation account for differences between neuron subtypes?

We did observe that GCaMP signals are higher at type Is synapses, where synapses tend to form later but GluRs accumulate more rapidly upon innervation (Aponte-Santiago et al., 2020). However, because we are using our GCaMP indicator as a plus/minus readout of synaptic vesicle release at mature synapses, we do not expect differences in GluR accumulation to have a significant effect on our measures. Consistently, the difference in Pr we observe between type-Ib and -Is inputs (Fig. 1C) is similar to that previously reported (He et al., 2023; Lu et al., 2016; Newman et al., 2022).

  1. The observation that calcium channel density and brp:cac ratio as a critical determinant of Pr is an important one. However, it is surprising that this was not observed in previous investigations of cac intensity (of which there are many). Is this purely a technical limitation of other investigations, or are other possibilities feasible? Additionally, regarding VGCC-SV coupling, the authors conclude that this packing density increases their proximity to SVs and contributes to the steeper relationship between VGCCs and Pr at phasic type Is. Is it possible that brp or other AZ components could account for these differences. The authors possess the tools to address this directly by labeling vesicles with JanellaFluor646; a stronger signal should be present at Is boutons. Additionally, many different studies have used transmission electron microscopy to explore SVs location to AZs (t-bars) at the Drosophila NMJ.

To date, the molecular underpinnings of heterogeneity in synaptic strength have primarily been investigated among individual type-Ib synapses. However, a recent study investigating differences between type-Ib and -Is synapses also found that the Cac:Brp ratio is higher at type-Is synapses (He et al., 2023).

At this point, we do not know which active zone components are responsible for the organizational (Figs. 1, 2) and coupling (now demonstrated by He et al., 2023) differences between type-Ib and -Is synapses or what establishes the differences in active zone protein levels we observe (Figs. 3,6), although Brp likely plays a local role. We find that Brp is required for dynamically regulating calcium channel levels during homeostatic plasticity and plays distinct roles at type-Ib and -Is synapses (Figs. 3, 4). Brp regulates a number of proteins critical for the distribution of docked synaptic vesicles near T bars of type Ib active zones, including Unc13 (Bohme et al., 2016). Extending these studies to type-Is synapses will be of great interest.

  1. In reference to the contradictory observations that VGCC intensity does not always correlate with, or determine Pr. Previous investigations have also observed other AZ proteins or interactors (e.g. synaptotagmin mutants) critically control release, even when the correlation between cac and release remains constant while Pr dramatically precipitates.

This is an important point as a number of molecular and organizational differences between high- and low-Pr synapses certainly contribute to baseline functional differences. The other proteins we (Figs. 3,6) and others (Dannhauser et al., 2022; Ehmann et al., 2014; He et al., 2023; Jetti et al., 2023; Mrestani et al., 2021; Newman et al., 2022) have investigated are less abundant and/or more densely organized at type-Is synapses. Investigating additional active zone proteins, including synaptic proteins, and determining how these factors combine to yield increased synaptic strength are important next steps.

  1. To confirm the observations that lower brp levels results in a significantly higher cac:brp ratio at phasic-like synapses by organizing VGCCs; this argument could be made stronger by analyzing their existing data. By selecting a population of AZs in Ib boutons that endogenously express normal cac and lower brp levels, the Pr from these should be higher than those from within that population, but comparable to Is Pr. I believe the authors should also be able to correlate the cac:brp ratio with Pr from their data set generally; to determine if a strong correlation exists beyond their observation for cac correlation.

We do not have simultaneous measures of Pr and Cac and Brp abundance. However, our findings suggest that distinct Cac:Brp ratios at type Ib and Is inputs reflect underlying organizational differences that contribute to distinct release probabilities between the two synaptic subtypes. In contrast, within either synaptic subtype, release probability is positively correlated with both Cac and Brp levels. Thus, the mechanisms driving functional differences between synaptic subtypes are distinct from those driving functional heterogeneity within a subtype, so we do not expect Cac:Brp ratio to correlate with Pr among individual type-Ib synapses. We will work to clarify this point in the revised text.

  1. For the philanthotoxin induced changes in cac and brp localization underlying PHP, why do the authors not show cac accumulation after PhTx on live dissected preparations (i.e. in real time)? This also be an excellent opportunity to validate their brp:cac theory. Do the authors observe a dynamic change in brp:cac after 1, or 5 minutes; do Is boutons potentiate stronger due to proportional increases in cac and brp? Also regarding PhTx-induced PHP, their observations that stj and α2δ-3 are more abundant at Is synapses, suggests that they may also play a role in PhTx induced changes in cac. If either/both are overexpressed during PhTx, brp should increase while cac remains constant. These accessory proteins may determine cac incorporation at AZs.

As we have previously followed Cac accumulation in live dissected preparations and found that levels increase proportionally across individual synapses (Gratz et al., 2019), we did not attempt to repeat these challenging experiments at smaller type-Is synapses. We will reanalyze our data to investigate Cac:Brp ratio at individual active zones post PhTx. However, as noted above, we do not expect changes in the Cac:Brp ratio to correlate with Pr among individual synapses of single inputs as this measure reflects organization differences between inputs and PhTx induces an increase in the abundance of both proteins at both inputs.

Determining the effect of PhTx on Stj levels at type-Ib and -Is active zones is an excellent idea and might provide insight into how lower Stj levels correlate with higher Pr at type-Is synapses. While prior studies have demonstrated critical roles for Stj in regulating Cac accumulation during development and in promoting presynaptic homeostatic potentiation (Cunningham et al., 2022; Dickman et al., 2008; Kurshan et al., 2009; Ly et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2016), its regulation during PHP has not been investigated.

Taken together this study generates important data-driven, conceptional, and theoretical advancements in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of different motor neurons, and our understanding of synaptic biology generally. The data are robust, thoroughly analyzed, appropriately depicted. This study not only generates novel findings but also generated novel molecular tools which will aid future investigations and investigators progress in this field.

References

Akbergenova, Y., K.L. Cunningham, Y.V. Zhang, S. Weiss, and J.T. Littleton. 2018. Characterization of developmental and molecular factors underlying release heterogeneity at Drosophila synapses. eLife. 7.

Aldahabi, M., F. Balint, N. Holderith, A. Lorincz, M. Reva, and Z. Nusser. 2022. Different priming states of synaptic vesicles underlie distinct release probabilities at hippocampal excitatory synapses. Neuron. 110:4144-4161 e4147.

Aponte-Santiago, N.A., K.G. Ormerod, Y. Akbergenova, and J.T. Littleton. 2020. Synaptic Plasticity Induced by Differential Manipulation of Tonic and Phasic Motoneurons in Drosophila. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 40:6270-6288.

Bohme, M.A., C. Beis, S. Reddy-Alla, E. Reynolds, M.M. Mampell, A.T. Grasskamp, J. Lutzkendorf, D.D. Bergeron, J.H. Driller, H. Babikir, F. Gottfert, I.M. Robinson, C.J. O'Kane, S.W. Hell, M.C. Wahl, U. Stelzl, B. Loll, A.M. Walter, and S.J. Sigrist. 2016. Active zone scaffolds differentially accumulate Unc13 isoforms to tune Ca(2+) channel-vesicle coupling. Nature neuroscience. 19:1311-1320.

Cunningham, K.L., C.W. Sauvola, S. Tavana, and J.T. Littleton. 2022. Regulation of presynaptic Ca(2+) channel abundance at active zones through a balance of delivery and turnover. Elife. 11.

Dannhauser, S., A. Mrestani, F. Gundelach, M. Pauli, F. Komma, P. Kollmannsberger, M. Sauer, M. Heckmann, and M.M. Paul. 2022. Endogenous tagging of Unc-13 reveals nanoscale reorganization at active zones during presynaptic homeostatic potentiation. Front Cell Neurosci. 16:1074304.

Dickman, D.K., P.T. Kurshan, and T.L. Schwarz. 2008. Mutations in a Drosophila alpha2delta voltagegated calcium channel subunit reveal a crucial synaptic function. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 28:31-38.

Ehmann, N., S. Van De Linde, A. Alon, D. Ljaschenko, X.Z. Keung, T. Holm, A. Rings, A. Diantonio, S. Hallermann, U. Ashery, M. Heckmann, M. Sauer, and R.J. Kittel. 2014. Quantitative super-resolution imaging of Bruchpilot distinguishes active zone states. Nature Communications. 5.

Ghelani, T., M. Escher, U. Thomas, K. Esch, J. Lützkendorf, H. Depner, M. Maglione, P. Parutto, S. Gratz, T. Matkovic-Rachid, S. Ryglewski, A.M. Walter, D. Holcman, K. O‘Connor Giles, M. Heine, and S.J. Sigrist. 2023. Interactive nanocluster compaction of the ELKS scaffold and Cacophony Ca2+ channels drives sustained active zone potentiation. Science Advances. 9:eade7804.

Gratz, S.J., P. Goel, J.J. Bruckner, R.X. Hernandez, K. Khateeb, G.T. Macleod, D. Dickman, and K.M. O'Connor-Giles. 2019. Endogenous tagging reveals differential regulation of Ca2+ channels at single AZs during presynaptic homeostatic potentiation and depression. The Journal of Neuroscience:3068-3018.

He, K., Y. Han, X. Li, R.X. Hernandez, D.V. Riboul, T. Feghhi, K.A. Justs, O. Mahneva, S. Perry, G.T. Macleod, and D. Dickman. 2023. Physiologic and Nanoscale Distinctions Define Glutamatergic Synapses in Tonic vs Phasic Neurons. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 43:4598-4611.

Holderith, N., A. Lorincz, G. Katona, B. Rózsa, A. Kulik, M. Watanabe, and Z. Nusser. 2012. Release probability of hippocampal glutamatergic terminals scales with the size of the active zone. Nature neuroscience. 15:988-997.

Jetti, S.K., A.B. Crane, Y. Akbergenova, N.A. Aponte-Santiago, K.L. Cunningham, C.A. Whittaker, and J.T. Littleton. 2023. Molecular Logic of Synaptic Diversity Between Drosophila Tonic and Phasic Motoneurons. bioRxiv:2023.2001.2017.524447.

Kurshan, P.T., A. Oztan, and T.L. Schwarz. 2009. Presynaptic alpha2delta-3 is required for synaptic morphogenesis independent of its Ca2+-channel functions. Nature neuroscience. 12:1415-1423.

Lu, Z., A.K. Chouhan, J.A. Borycz, Z. Lu, A.J. Rossano, K.L. Brain, Y. Zhou, I.A. Meinertzhagen, and G.T. Macleod. 2016. High-Probability Neurotransmitter Release Sites Represent an Energy-Efficient Design. Current biology : CB. 26:2562-2571.

Ly , C.V., C.-K. Yao , P. Verstreken , T. Ohyama , and H.J. Bellen 2008. straightjacket is required for the synaptic stabilization of cacophony, a voltage-gated calcium channel α1 subunit. Journal of Cell Biology. 181:157-170.

Mrestani, A., M. Pauli, P. Kollmannsberger, F. Repp, R.J. Kittel, J. Eilers, S. Doose, M. Sauer, A.-L. Sirén, M. Heckmann, and M.M. Paul. 2021. Active zone compaction correlates with presynaptic homeostatic potentiation. Cell Reports. 37:109770.

Nakamura, Y., H. Harada, N. Kamasawa, K. Matsui, Jason S. Rothman, R. Shigemoto, R.A. Silver, David A. DiGregorio, and T. Takahashi. 2015. Nanoscale Distribution of Presynaptic Ca2+ Channels and Its Impact on Vesicular Release during Development. Neuron. 85:145-158.

Newman, Z.L., D. Bakshinskaya, R. Schultz, S.J. Kenny, S. Moon, K. Aghi, C. Stanley, N. Marnani, R. Li, J. Bleier, K. Xu, and E.Y. Isacoff. 2022. Determinants of synapse diversity revealed by superresolution quantal transmission and active zone imaging. Nature Communications. 13:229.

Rebola, N., M. Reva, T. Kirizs, M. Szoboszlay, A. Lőrincz, G. Moneron, Z. Nusser, and D.A. Digregorio. 2019. Distinct Nanoscale Calcium Channel and Synaptic Vesicle Topographies Contribute to the Diversity of Synaptic Function. Neuron. 104:693-710.e699.

Sheng, J., L. He, H. Zheng, L. Xue, F. Luo, W. Shin, T. Sun, T. Kuner, D.T. Yue, and L.-G. Wu. 2012. Calcium-channel number critically influences synaptic strength and plasticity at the active zone. Nature neuroscience. 15:998-1006.

Wang, T., R.T. Jones, J.M. Whippen, and G.W. Davis. 2016. alpha2delta-3 Is Required for Rapid Transsynaptic Homeostatic Signaling. Cell Rep. 16:2875-2888.

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  4. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation