| Literature DB >> 31848688 |
Nadine J Ortner1, Alexandra Pinggera2, Nadja T Hofer2, Anita Siller2, Niels Brandt3, Andrea Raffeiner4, Kristina Vilusic2, Isabelle Lang3, Kerstin Blum3, Gerald J Obermair5,6, Eduard Stefan4, Jutta Engel3, Jörg Striessnig7.
Abstract
Cav1.3 L-typeEntities:
Keywords: Cav1.3; Inactivation; Inner hair cells; L-type Ca2+ channel; RIM-binding protein; Ribbon synapse
Year: 2019 PMID: 31848688 PMCID: PMC6960213 DOI: 10.1007/s00424-019-02338-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pflugers Arch ISSN: 0031-6768 Impact factor: 3.657
Fig. 1Interaction of RBP2 with Cav1.3 channels. RIMs and RBPs are multidomain proteins [41, 46]. All RIM isoforms (RIM1α and 1β; RIM2α, 2β, and 2γ; RIM3γ and RIM4γ) bind via their C2B domain to the auxiliary β subunit of the Ca2+ channel complex. Disruption of the SH3 or GK domain in the β subunit prevents the interaction with RIM [28]. All three RBP isoforms contain three SH3 domains and two (RBP3) or three (RBP1 and 2) FN3 domains [41]. The second SH3 domain of RBP binds to the proline-rich region (PXXP) present only in RIMα or β isoforms, located between the two C2 domains. The other SH3 domains, marked by “x,” in turn can interact with a proline-rich region (PXXP) localized in the full-length Cav1.3 C terminus [23]. Note that incorporation of alternative exons 42A and 43S leads to short C-terminal splice variants (Cav1.342A or Cav1.343S, respectively; C-terminal ends indicated by orange dots) lacking the PXXP interaction site. AID, α-interaction domain; FN3, fibronectin 3 domain; GK, guanylate-kinase like domain; PXXP, proline-rich region; SH3, SRC homology 3 domain; Zn2+, zinc finger domain. Note that RIM may also interact via its C2B domain with the C terminus of Cav1.3, but the interaction site is unknown [49]
Fig. 2RIM, RBP, and Cav1.3 α1 subunit expression in IHCs. Control experiments in IHC preparations revealed the expected transcripts of long (containing exon 43) and short C-terminal splice variants (containing exon 43S) of Cav1.3 α1 subunits (top left). RIM2α was reliably detected in IHCs (4 out of 4 independent preparations) before (P6) and after hearing onset (after P12) (top right). RBP1 was the only isoform, which could not be detected in IHCs at any tested developmental stage (cDNA preparations from 5 different mice at different postnatal days, not shown). RBP2 transcripts (bottom left) were found only in 1 out of 5 different samples before hearing onset but were consistently detected in mature IHCs (8 out of 9 separate preparations). RBP3 transcripts (bottom right) were identified before as well as after hearing onset (6 out of 6 and 8 out of 10 independent samples, respectively). Brain samples from adult mice and reactions without template (“ctrl”) were used as positive and negative controls, respectively. Representative PCRs from > 3 independent experiments are shown
Fig. 3RBP2 co-localization with Cav1.3 at ribbon synapses in mouse IHCs. a–h Maximum intensity projection (MIP) of confocal stacks of whole-mount organs of Corti with stretches of 7–8 IHCs. a–d IHCs from the apical cochlear turn of a 4-week-old NMRI mouse co-immunolabeled for Cav1.3 and RBP2 demonstrate that almost every Cav1.3 cluster co-localized with RBP2 at the basolateral pole of the IHCs (a), which is shown in more detail in the enlargements of the box in a (b–d). e–h IHCs from the apical cochlear turn of a 4-week-old NMRI mouse co-immunolabeled for the ribbon synapse marker CtBP2 and RBP2 show that almost every ribbon co-localized with RBP2 at the basolateral pole (e), which is shown in more detail in the enlargements of the box in e (f–h). Nuclei stained in blue with DAPI are shown only in the merged images. The dotted lines in a and e outline the basolateral pole of one IHC in each specimen. Scale bars: a, e, 10 μm; d, h, 5 μm
Fig. 4RBP2 interaction with Cav1.3 C-terminal splice variants. a Schematic representation of the Cav1.3 C-terminal GST-fusion proteins: GST-Cav1.3 42C-term (GST-42), GST-Cav1.3 42AC-term (GST-42A), and GST-Cav1.3 43SC-term (GST-43S) including the binding position for the anti-Cav1.3α12022–2138 antibody (anti-42) in the full-length C terminus. Numbers indicate the amino acid position in the Cav1.3 protein (GenBank™ accession number NM_000720). b GST pull-down of whole-cell extracts prepared from HEK293 cells transfected with HA-RBP2 with the indicated Cav1.3 C termini coupled to GST; 1 of 4 similar experiments is illustrated. Bound HA-RBP2 was visualized by western blotting using anti-HA. Anti-GAPDH staining served as a negative control. Input—0.5, 0.25, and 0.1% of the lysate. GST, GST-RIIβ, and GST-max p14 were control peptides not binding to HA-RBP2. Migration of molecular mass markers is indicated. c Left: Ponceau staining of GST-fusion proteins. Arrows indicate the migration of the full-length construct. Despite the partial degradation of GST-fusion proteins GST-42 and GST-42A, we observed selective protein–protein interactions between GST-42 and RBP2. Right: Immunoblot from panel b was stripped and the presence of GST-Cav1.3 42C-term was verified by immunoblotting using anti-Cav1.3α12022–2138 antibody directed against an epitope present only in the long C-terminal splice variant as illustrated in panel a. d Confirmation of HA-RBP2 interaction with the long Cav1.3 C terminus by co-immunoprecipitation of HA-rRBP2 expressed in tsA-201 cells with YFP-tagged long Cav1.3 C terminus (YFP-Cav1.3 42C-term; YFP-42). Top: Verification of the presence of YFP-Cav1.3 42C-term by immunoblotting using an YFP antibody. Bottom: Specific immunoprecipitation of RBP2 by Cav1.3 42C-term (detection by anti-RBP2-1318). Input control—1 and 0.5% of the lysate. Mock: untransfected control
Fig. 5Detection of β2 subunit splice variants in mouse cochlea, IHC, and OHC preparations. β2 transcripts (β2gen) were detected in 4 of 8 independent experiments of 3 independent IHC samples. Its N-terminal splice variants were reproducibly detected in mouse cochlea preparations (8 of 8 independent experiments of at least 3 independent samples) and brain (4 of 4 independent experiments of at least 3 independent samples). However, the reproducible specific detection of N-terminal splice variants in IHC and OHC preparations using different primer combinations (see “Material and methods” section) was unsuccessful. Brain samples from adult mice and reactions without template (“ctrl”) were used as positive and negative controls, respectively
Fig. 6Expression levels of β1–4 isoforms and β2 splice variants. Results of individual experiments are illustrated. a, b Expression levels of β1–4 isoforms in IHCs, OHCs (a P6; b P20), and organ of Corti preparations (P5) from one IHC and two independent OHC and organ of Corti preparations. c Expression levels of N-terminal β2 splice variants in IHCs (P22), OHCs (P24), and whole cochlea (P23) preparations from three independent RNA preparations from three NMRI mice. IHC, inner hair cell; OHC, outer hair cell; P, postnatal
Fig. 7Modulation of VDI by β3 and different β2 subunit splice variants (15 mM Ba2+). a, b Left panels: mean (± SEM) IBa traces for Cav1.3L/α2δ1 (a) or Cav1.342A/α2δ1 (b) co-expressed with either β3 (black/gray), β2a (red), or β2e (purple). The number of individual recordings is indicated in parentheses. VDI was quantified using 15 mM Ba2+ as charge carrier and calculated as residual IBa at the indicated predefined time points (bar graphs). Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test (a) or unpaired Student’s t test (b): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05. For detailed statistics, see Table 2
Voltage-dependent inactivation (VDI) during a 5-s depolarizing pulse from a HP of − 89 mV to Vmax was quantified by calculating the residual Ba2+ current fraction after 250, 1000, or 5000 ms (r250, r1000, r5000)
| Construct | r250 [%] | r500 [%] | r1000 [%] | r5000 [%] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cav1.3L/β3 | 76.9 ± 3.3 | 62.2 ± 4.1 | 48.8 ± 4.4 | 22.6 ± 3.5 | 9 |
| + RIM2α | 88.9 ± 2.7** | 80.6 ± 3.5** | 69.6 ± 4.0** | 32.6 ± 4.1 | 11 |
| + RBP2 | 82.4 ± 2.4 | 70.9 ± 3.3 | 59.9 ± 3.8 | 31.8 ± 3.3 | 14 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | 94.9 ± 0.9*** | 90.6 ± 1.6*** | 83.7 ± 2.3***,# | 52.0 ± 3.7***,## | 17 |
| Cav1.342A/β3 | 87.1 ± 2.1 | 76.0 ± 3.3 | 61.4 ± 4.2 | 26.1 ± 3.5 | 14 |
| + RIM2α | 97.3 ± 1.0* | 94.3 ± 1.6** | 88.4 ± 2.1*** | 53.8 ± 3.6*** | 11 |
| + RBP2 | 88.9 ± 3.1 | 79.4 ± 4.4 | 65.9 ± 5.5 | 27.3 ± 2.6 | 9 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | 90.9 ± 4.3 | 85.1 ± 6.0 | 74.6 ± 7.3 | 45.9 ± 6.4** | 9 |
| Cav1.3L/β2a | 92.0 ± 2.6 | 85.0 ± 3.6 | 77.3 ± 5.0 | 51.3 ± 6.7 | 9 |
| + RIM2α | 91.1 ± 1.9 | 85.1 ± 3.2 | 77.7 ± 4.4 | 48.6 ± 6.6 | 7 |
| + RBP2 | 92.3 ± 0.4 | 85.7 ± 0.8 | 77.8 ± 0.9 | 49.5 ± 1.9 | 6 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | 92.6 ± 1.0 | 86.4 ± 1.7 | 79.3 ± 2.5 | 52.2 ± 3.9 | 10 |
| Cav1.3L/β2e | 87.9 ± 2.1 | 78.9 ± 3.3 | 65.9 ± 4.5 | 31.1 ± 4.0 | 7 |
| + RIM2α | 90.8 ± 1.8 | 84.0 ± 2.5 | 70.0 ± 2.9 | 40.4 ± 3.4 | 8 |
| + RBP2 | 85.3 ± 4.7 | 77.3 ± 6.9 | 64.5 ± 9.1 | 34.8 ± 8.5 | 6 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | 87.9 ± 2.3 | 81.4 ± 3.1 | 73.0 ± 3.7 | 45.4 ± 3.4 | 10 |
| Cav1.342A/β2a | 97.6 ± 0.8 | 95.0 ± 1.3 | 89.6 ± 1.8 | 62.0 ± 2.8 | 8 |
| + RIM2α | 96.5 ± 1.0 | 92.3 ± 1.6 | 85.6 ± 2.6 | 49.9 ± 3.8 | 10 |
| + RBP2 | 97.6 ± 0.9 | 94.6 ± 1.5 | 89.1 ± 2.2 | 59.9 ± 3.7 | 11 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | 96.7 ± 1.0 | 92.8 ± 1.5 | 85.8 ± 2.0 | 52.3 ± 2.8 | 10 |
Data are given as means ± SEM. Statistical significance was determined by one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s multiple comparison post hoc test as indicated in the table. Versus control (Cav1.3 without RIM2α and/or RBP2): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05; RIM2α versus RIM2α/RBP2 ##p < 0.01; #p < 0.05
Fig. 8Modulation of Cav1.3L/α2δ1/β3 Ba2+ currents (15 mM) by co-expression of RIM2α and/or RBP2. a Schematic illustration of measured LTCC complexes, from left to right: control (Cav1.3L/α2δ1/β3); plus RIM2α; plus RBP2; plus RIM2α/RBP2. Data in panels b and c are shown for each recording condition. Color code: control (black), plus RIM2α (blue), plus RBP2 (green), and plus RIM2α/RBP2 (red). bIBa inactivation time course during a 5-s long depolarization to the Vmax (y-axis labels as in the left panel). Traces were normalized to the IBa peak and are shown as mean ± SEM for the indicated number of recordings. c Voltage dependence of IBa steady-state activation and inactivation (y-axis label as in the left panel). For parameters and statistics, see panel d and Table 1. d Statistics of two activation parameters (V0.5,act and activation threshold) are shown. e Bar graphs showing the remaining IBa after 250, 500, 1000, or 5000 ms. Data shown as mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s multiple comparison post hoc test as indicated in the graph: versus control (Cav1.3 without RIM2α and/or RBP2): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05; RIM2α versus RIM2α/RBP2: ###p < 0.001; ##p < 0.01; #p < 0.05
Parameters of the voltage dependence of steady-state activation (left) or inactivation (right) of Cav1.3L or Cav1.342A LTCCs measured with α2δ1 and different β subunits (β3, β2a, β2e) in the presence or absence of RIM2α and/or RBP2
| Construct | Activation | Inactivation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Act thresh [mV] | Plateau [%] | |||||||
| Cav1.3L/β3 | − 11.5 ± 0.8 | 7.8 ± 0.1 | − 41.3 ± 0.9 | 20 | − 27.6 ± 2.2 | 6.0 ± 0.3 | 27.9 ± 3.4 | 9 |
| + RIM2α | − 14.4 ± 0.9 | 8.1 ± 0.1 | − 45.8 ± 0.7*** | 19 | − 28.4 ± 1.7 | 6.3 ± 0.5 | 30.6 ± 2.8 | 11 |
| + RBP2 | − 14.8 ± 0.9* | 7.6 ± 0.2 | − 43.2 ± 0.5 | 21 | − 25.6 ± 2.0 | 5.5 ± 0.2 | 38.1 ± 3.5 | 14 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | − 14.1 ± 0.9 | 8.1 ± 0.2 | − 44.5 ± 0.6** | 21 | − 23.5 ± 1.3 | 7.6 ± 0.5 | 50.8 ± 3.1***,### | 17 |
| Cav1.342A/β3 | − 19.0 ± 0.7 | 6.9 ± 0.2 | − 44.5 ± 0.6 | 21 | − 30.6 ± 1.3 | 4.8 ± 0.2 | 27.4 ± 2.9 | 14 |
| + RIM2α | − 23.1 ± 0.5*** | 6.6 ± 0.1 | − 47.4 ± 0.6** | 18 | − 30.6 ± 0.6 | 5.1 ± 0.3 | 44.1 ± 2.8*** | 11 |
| + RBP2 | − 20.7 ± 0.9 | 6.5 ± 0.2 | − 44.4 ± 0.6 | 12 | − 29.2 ± 1.4 | 5.1 ± 0.5 | 28.6 ± 2.7 | 9 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | − 21.8 ± 0.9* | 6.8 ± 0.1 | − 47.0 ± 1.0 | 13 | − 30.9 ± 1.6 | 5.6 ± 0.5 | 36.4 ± 3.9 | 9 |
| Cav1.3L/β2a | − 7.2 ± 1.4 | 9.4 ± 0.1 | − 44.1 ± 1.1 | 17 | − 16.5 ± 2.3 | 13.0 ± 0.8 | 47.6 ± 5.6 | 9 |
| + RIM2α | − 9.2 ± 1.8 | 9.1 ± 0.2 | − 44.4 ± 1.4 | 9 | − 17.3 ± 4.3 | 11.3 ± 1.2 | 45.1 ± 4.6 | 7 |
| + RBP2 | − 11.0 ± 1.2 | 9.1 ± 0.2 | − 46.2 ± 1.3 | 10 | − 18.8 ± 1.9 | 11.1 ± 0.7 | 51.8 ± 2.5 | 6 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | − 12.2 ± 1.0* | 9.2 ± 0.2 | − 48.0 ± 0.8* | 17 | − 20.0 ± 2.2 | 10.9 ± 0.5 | 52.4 ± 3.6 | 10 |
| Cav1.3L/β2e | − 7.5 ± 2.1 | 8.8 ± 0.3 | − 41.9 ± 1.2 | 11 | − 24.0 ± 2.8 | 7.5 ± 0.8 | 25.6 ± 4.3 | 7 |
| + RIM2α | − 13.5 ± 1.5* | 8.9 ± 0.2 | − 47.8 ± 1.0** | 11 | − 22.4 ± 1.6 | 9.0 ± 0.4 | 42.4 ± 3.3* | 8 |
| + RBP2 | − 7.8 ± 0.8 | 9.1 ± 0.2 | − 43.0 ± 1.0 | 11 | − 21.1 ± 2.0 | 9.7 ± 1.0 | 32.2 ± 7.2 | 6 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | − 15.6 ± 1.4** | 8.5 ± 0.1 | − 47.7 ± 1.0** | 15 | − 24.6 ± 2.5 | 8.5 ± 0.7 | 42.6 ± 2.5* | 10 |
| Cav1.342A/β2a | − 22.2 ± 1.2 | 7.5 ± 0.2 | − 50.2 ± 1.1 | 14 | − 32.4 ± 1.8 | 6.7 ± 0.6 | 60.9 ± 3.5 | 8 |
| + RIM2α | − 23.2 ± 0.6 | 7.3 ± 0.3 | − 50.2 ± 1.4 | 14 | − 35.0 ± 1.4 | 5.4 ± 0.3 | 49.1 ± 4.3 | 10 |
| + RBP2 | − 21.9 ± 1.1 | 7.0 ± 0.1 | − 47.5 ± 1.3 | 13 | − 32.2 ± 1.7 | 5.8 ± 0.5 | 56.0 ± 4.3 | 11 |
| + RIM2α/RBP2 | − 23.3 ± 0.8 | 7.3 ± 0.2 | − 50.5 ± 1.1 | 16 | − 34.0 ± 1.6 | 6.5 ± 0.9 | 45.8 ± 3.0* | 10 |
Data are given as means ± SEM. Statistical significance was determined by one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s multiple comparison post hoc test as indicated in the table. Versus control (Cav1.3 without RIM2α and/or RBP2): ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05; RIM2α versus RIM2α/RBP2: ###p < 0.001
V, voltage of half-maximal activation; k, slope factor; act thresh, activation threshold (voltage where 5% of maximal IBa is reached); V, voltage of half-maximal inactivation; k, inactivation slope factor
Fig. 9Modulation of Cav1.342A/α2δ1/β3 Ba2+ currents (15 mM) by co-expression of RIM2α and/or RBP2. Color code: control (black), plus RIM2α (blue), plus RBP2 (green), and plus RIM2α/RBP2 (red). Experimental conditions and statistical analysis are as described in Fig. 8
Fig. 10Modulation of Cav1.3L/α2δ1/β2a Ba2+ currents (15 mM) by co-expression of RIM2α and/or RBP2. Color code: control (black), plus RIM2α (blue), plus RBP2 (green), and plus RIM2α/RBP2 (red). Experimental conditions and statistical analysis are as described in Fig. 8
Fig. 11Modulation of Cav1.3L/α2δ1/β2e Ba2+ currents (15 mM) by co-expression of RIM2α and/or RBP2. Color code: control (black), plus RIM2α (blue), plus RBP2 (green), and plus RIM2α/RBP2 (red). Experimental conditions and statistical analysis are as described in Fig. 8
Fig. 12Modulation of Cav1.342A/α2δ1/β2a Ba2+ currents (15 mM) by co-expression of RIM2α and/or RBP2. Color code: control (black), plus RIM2α (blue), plus RBP2 (green), and plus RIM2α/RBP2 (red). Experimental conditions and statistical analysis are as described in Fig. 8
Fig. 13Comparison of RIM2α/RBP2-stabilized Cav1.3LIBa inactivation (β3 and β2a; tsA-201 cells) with IBa VDI measured in IHCs. Mean IBa (15 mM) traces of Cav1.3L/α2δ1 with β3 (black), β3/RIM2α/RBP2 (dark red), or β2a/RIM2α/RBP2 (red) during the first 2 s of a depolarization to Vmax. For comparison, we recorded IBa in mature mouse IHCs measured as recently described [53] in mature mouse IHCs (mean IBa trace from 5 individual recordings; gray; 10 mM Ba2+). Circles indicate the remaining Ba2+ current at the indicated time points recorded from IHCs taken from previously published papers: [33] (dark blue; 10 mM Ba2+, mouse P20); [42] (turquoise; 5 mM Ba2+, mouse P40–70); [9] (purple; 5 mM Ba2+, mouse 2–4 weeks); [24] (yellow; 5 mM Ba2+, gerbil P50); [34] (green; 20 mM Ba2+, chicken 1–21 days). Turquoise and purple circles are overlapping and are therefore shown together as half-filled circle