Literature DB >> 12596922

Tuning outer segment Ca2+ homeostasis to phototransduction in rods and cones.

Juan I Korenbrot1, Tatiana I Rebrik.   

Abstract

Cone photoreceptors respond to light with less sensitivity, faster kinetics and adapt over a much wider range of intensities than do rods. These differences can be explained, in part, by the quantitative differences in the molecular processes that regulate the cytoplasmic free Ca2+ concentration in the outer segment of both receptor types. Ca2+ concentration is regulated through the kinetic balance between the ions' influx and efflux and the action of intracellular buffers. Influx is passive and mediated by the cyclic-GMP gated ion channels. In cones, Ca2+ ions carry about 35% of the ionic current flowing through the channels in darkness. In rods, in contrast, this fraction is about 20%. We present a kinetic rate model of the ion channels that helps explain the differences in their Ca2+ fractional flux. In cones, but not in rods, the cGMP-sensitivity of the cyclic GMP-gated ion channels changes with Ca2+ at the concentrations expected in dark-adapted photoreceptors. Ca2+ efflux is active and mediated by a Na+ and K+-dependent exchanger. The rate of Ca2+ clearance mediated by the exchanger in cones, regardless of the absolute size of their outer segment is of the order of tens of milliseconds. In rod outer segments, and again independently of their size, Ca2+ clearance rate is of the order of hundreds of milliseconds to seconds. We investigate the functional consequences of these differences in Ca2+ homeostasis using computational models of the phototransduction signal in rods and cones. Consistent with experimental observation, differences in Ca2+ homeostasis can make the cone's flash response faster and less sensitive to light than that of rods. In the simulations, however, changing Ca2+ homeostasis is not sufficient to recreate authentic cone responses. Accelerating the rate of inactivation (but NOT activation) of the enzymes of the transduction cascade, in addition, to changes in Ca2+ homeostasis are needed to explain the differences between rod and cone photosignals. The large gain and precise kinetic control of the electrical photoresponse of rod and cone retinal receptors suggested a long time back that phototransduction is mediated by cytoplasmic second messengers that, in turn, control membrane ionic conductance. (1) The unquestionable identification of cyclic GMP as the phototransduction messenger, however, did not come until the mid 1980's with the discovery that the light-regulated membrane conductance in both rods and cones is gated by this nucleotide (2-4) and is, in fact, an ion channel. (7) The cyclic nucleotide gated (CNG) channels, now we know, are not just the compliant targets of light-dependent change in cytoplasmic cGMP, but actively participate in the regulation transduction through Ca2+ feedback signals. The precise magnitude and time course of the concentration changes of cGMP and Ca2+ in either rods or cones remains controversial. It is clear, however, that whereas cGMP directly controls the opening and closing of the plasma membrane channels, Ca2+ controls the light-sensitivity and kinetics of the transduction signal. (8,9) The modulatory role of Ca2+ is particularly apparent in the process of light adaptation: in light-adapted rods or cones, the transduction signal generated by a given flash is lower in sensitivity and faster in time course than in dark-adapted cells. Light adaptation is compromised if Ca2+ concentration changes are attenuated by cytopiasmic Ca2+ buffers (8,10,11) and does not occur if Ca2+ concentration changes are prevented by manipulation of the solution bathing the cells. (2,4) Several Ca2+-dependent biochemical reactions have been identified in photoreceptors, among them: 1. ATP-dependent deactivation. (15,16) 2 Phodopsin phospshorylation, through the action of recoverin (S-modulin). (17-19) 3. Catalytic activity of guanylyl cyclase, (20-22) through the action of GCAP proteins. (23,24,25) 4. cGMP-sensitivity of the CNG channels. (26-29,30) A challenge in contemporary phototransduction research is to understand the details of these reactions and their role in the control of the phototransduction signal. Transduction signals in cone photoreceptors are faster, lower in light sensitivity, and more robust in their adaptation features than those in rods (for review see refs. 31;32). A detailed molecular explanation for these differences is not at hand. However, biochemical and electrophysiological (33) studies indicate that the elements in the light-activated pathway that hydrolyzes cGMP are quantitatively similar in their function in rods and cones and unlikely to account for the functional differences. Also, within the limited exploration completed todate, the Ca2+-dependence of guanylyl cyclase (34) and visual pigment phosphorylation (19) do not differ in rods and cones. On the other hand, data accumulated over the past few years indicate that cytoplasmic Ca2+ homeostasis, while controlled through essentially identical mechanisms it is quantitatively very different in its features in the two photoreceptor types. Both Ca2+ influx through CNG channels and the rate of Ca2+ clearance from the outer segment differ between the two receptor cells. Also, the Ca2+-dependent modulation of cGMP sensitivity is larger in extent in cones than in rods. Most significantly, the concentration range of this Ca2+ dependence overlaps the physiological range of light-dependent changes in cytoplasmic Ca2+ level in cones, but not in rods. We briefly review some of the evidence that supports these assertions and we then provide a quantitative analysis of the possible significance of these known differences. We conclude that while differences in Ca2+ homeostasis contribute importantly to explaining the differences between the two receptor types, they are alone not sufficient to explain the differences in the photoreceptor's response. It is likely that Ca2+-independent inactivation of the transduction cascade enzymes is more rapid in cones than in rods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12596922     DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4615-0121-3_11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol        ISSN: 0065-2598            Impact factor:   2.622


  26 in total

1.  Role of guanylyl cyclase modulation in mouse cone phototransduction.

Authors:  Keisuke Sakurai; Jeannie Chen; Vladimir J Kefalov
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 2.  Speed, sensitivity, and stability of the light response in rod and cone photoreceptors: facts and models.

Authors:  Juan I Korenbrot
Journal:  Prog Retin Eye Res       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 21.198

3.  Kinetics of exocytosis is faster in cones than in rods.

Authors:  Katalin Rabl; Lucia Cadetti; Wallace B Thoreson
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-05-04       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Serca isoform expression in the mammalian retina.

Authors:  David Krizaj
Journal:  Exp Eye Res       Date:  2005-06-20       Impact factor: 3.467

Review 5.  Kinetics of synaptic transmission at ribbon synapses of rods and cones.

Authors:  Wallace B Thoreson
Journal:  Mol Neurobiol       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 5.590

Review 6.  How vision begins: an odyssey.

Authors:  Dong-Gen Luo; Tian Xue; King-Wai Yau
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Shedding light on cones.

Authors:  Barry E Knox; Eduardo Solessio
Journal:  J Gen Physiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.086

8.  The limit of photoreceptor sensitivity: molecular mechanisms of dark noise in retinal cones.

Authors:  David Holcman; Juan I Korenbrot
Journal:  J Gen Physiol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.086

Review 9.  The pharmacology of cyclic nucleotide-gated channels: emerging from the darkness.

Authors:  R Lane Brown; Timothy Strassmaier; James D Brady; Jeffrey W Karpen
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.116

Review 10.  Phototransduction motifs and variations.

Authors:  King-Wai Yau; Roger C Hardie
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 41.582

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.