| Literature DB >> 27013956 |
Xi Wang1, Xiao-Gang Zhang1, Ting-Ting Zhou2, Na Li1, Chun-Yan Jang1, Zhi-Cheng Xiao3, Quan-Hong Ma4, Shao Li1.
Abstract
Aberrant increases in neuronal network excitability may contribute to the cognitive deficits in Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the mechanisms underlying hyperexcitability are not fully understood. Such overexcitation of neuronal networks has been detected in the brains of APP/PS1 mice. In the present study, using current-clamp recording techniques, we observed that 12 days in vitro (DIV) primary cultured pyramidal neurons from P0 APP/PS1 mice exhibited a more prominent action potential burst and a lower threshold than WT littermates. Moreover, after treatment with Aβ1-42 peptide, 12 DIV primary cultured neurons showed similar changes, to a greater degree than in controls. Voltage-clamp recordings revealed that the voltage-dependent sodium current density of neurons incubated with Aβ1-42 was significantly increased, without change in the voltage-dependent sodium channel kinetic characteristics. Immunohistochemistry and western blot results showed that, after treatment with Aβ1-42, expressions of Nav and Nav1.6 subtype increased in cultured neurons or APP/PS1 brains compared to control groups. The intrinsic neuronal hyperexcitability of APP/PS1 mice might thus be due to an increased expression of voltage-dependent sodium channels induced by Aβ1-42. These results may illuminate the mechanism of aberrant neuronal networks in AD.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer's disease; beta-amyloid peptide; excitability; neurodegeneration; voltage-gated sodium channel
Year: 2016 PMID: 27013956 PMCID: PMC4783403 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2016.00094
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 4.677
Figure 1Increased neuronal excitability in APP/PS1 mice. (A) Representative recording traces of action potential repetitive firing. (B) The schematic of threshold. (C) Representative recording traces of action potential peak amplitude. (D) The mean number of APs elicited by 200 pA depolarizing current. Neurons from APP/PS1 mice (n = 10) fired significantly more APs than WT (n = 12). (E) AP threshold in APP/PS1 mice cultured pyramidal neurons was significantly lower than WT mice (n = 9 per group). (F) The peak amplitude of APs in WT and APP/PS1 (n = 9 per group) mice cultured pyramidal neurons didn't show significantly difference. Mean ± SEM was displayed. *Presents p < 0.05; **presents p < 0.01.
Figure 2Aβ affects neuronal excitability. (A) Representative recording traces of action potential repetitive firing. (B) The schematic of threshold. (C) Representative recording traces of action potential peak amplitude. (D) The mean number of APs elicited by 200 pA depolarizing current. Neurons after Aβ1−42 treatment (n = 8) fired significantly more APs than controls (both negative control group and reverse peptide Aβ42−1 group, n = 8). (E) AP threshold in pyramidal neurons treated with Aβ1−42 (n = 7) was significantly lower than controls (n = 7). (F) The peak amplitude of APs in pyramidal neurons treated with Aβ1−42 (n = 7) didn't show significantly difference with controls (n = 7). Mean ± SEM was displayed. *Presents p < 0.05 vs. control group; **presents p < 0.01 vs. control group; presents p < 0.01 vs. Aβ1−42 group.
Figure 3Aβ Representative traces of voltage gated sodium currents recorded in response to voltage steps from −60 to +60 mV. (B) Current density-voltage relationship, illustrates that Na+ current density recorded from Aβ1−42 treatment pyramidal neurons was significantly bigger than counterparts (negative control group and reverse peptide Aβ42−−1 group, n = 12). (C) Graph, data showed peak current density recorded from Aβ1−42 treatment neurons was significantly bigger than counterparts (n = 12). (D) Normalized steady-state activation curves for Na+ currents recorded from cultured pyramidal neurons after Aβ1−42 treatment and counterparts (n = 12). The activation curves were not significantly shift after Aβ1−42 treatment. (E) Normalized steady-state inactivation curves for Na+ currents recorded from these three groups, and the inactivation curve was not significantly shift after Aβ1−42 treatment either. Mean ± SEM was displayed. **Presents p < 0.01 vs. Aβ1−42 group; presents p < 0.01 vs. Aβ1−42 group.
Figure 4Aβ Equal amounts of collected protein samples obtained from 12 DIV neurons after different treatments were analyzed by western blot to detect the protein expression level of sodium channel (n = 3 per group). (B) Quantification of protein levels of sodium channel. β-actin was used as an internal control (n = 3 per group). (C) Western blots of 12 DIV neurons after different treatments to detect the expression of Nav1.6 protein (n = 3 per group). (D) Quantification of protein levels of Nav1.6. β-tubulin was used as an internal control (n = 3 per group). (E) RT-PCR of Nav1.6 mRNA levels of 12 DIV neurons after different treatments (n = 3 per group). (F) Quantification of mRNA levels of Nav1.6. β-actin was used as an internal control (n = 3 per group). Mean ± SEM was displayed. *Presents p < 0.05 vs. Aβ1−42 group; #presents p < 0.05 vs. Aβ1−42 group.
Figure 5Elevated expression of Nav1.6 in cultured neurons and APP/PS1 mice. (A) Immunohistochemistry images of 12 DIV primary cortical culture neurons after 24 h Aβ42−1 or Aβ1−42 treatments stained with anti-Nav1.6 antibody. Scale bar = 50 μm (n = 3 per group). (B) Immunostaining images of temporal lobe cortex sections obtained from 9 months APP/PS1 mice and its littermates co-stained with anti-Nav1.6 antibody and anti-MAP2 antibody (n = 3 per group). (C) Quantification of Nav1.6 immunohistochemistry images by using intensity analysis (n = 3 per group). (D) Quantification of fluorescence intensity of Nav1.6 (n = 3 per group). Mean ± SEM was displayed. *Presents p < 0.05 vs. control group.