Biochemical studies of taste sensation. XIII. Enantiomeric specificity of alanine taste receptor sites in catfish, Ictalurus punctatus.

Specific binding of amino acid taste stimuli is known to occur to a sedimentable fraction (P2) from catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) taste epithelium or to purified plasma membranes from that fraction. L-Alanine, a potent taste stimulus for the catfish, binds in a reversible and saturable manner to these preparations. The extent to which the enantiomeric stimuli, L- and D-alanine, interact with the same or different receptor/transduction processes is investigated here both electrophysiologically and biochemically. With an electrophysiological assay, L-alanine was the more potent stimulus across a concentration range of 10(-9)-10(-3) M, yet both enantiomers displayed approximately the same threshold. The concentration-electrophysiological response functions for each enantiomer were different. That of L-alanine was approximately linear across the (log) concentration range while that of D-alanine was non-linear, with small but definitely observable responses being noted from 10(-9)-10(-5) M D-alanine, and larger incremental responses thereafter. With most of the nerve bundle preparations studies, L- and D-alanine cross-adapted one another, but this cross-adaptation was not always complete. Experiments in which both L- and D-alanine were present in a 1:1 mixture of equally stimulatory concentrations suggested the existence of receptor or transduction processes unique to each enantiomer. Biochemically binding studies demonstrated high affinity binding sites for both enantiomers with values of Kd-app for L-alanine of 1.5 microM and for D-alanine of 25 microM. For both enantiomers, additional lower-affinity binding sites were observable. The capacity of the lower-affinity sites was particularly great for D-alanine. The enantiomers competed one with the other for binding, with L-alanine showing greater competitive ability than D-alanine at low concentrations. For the high affinity sites, double-reciprocal plots of the data suggested a competitive mechanism. The lower affinity sites for D-alanine were less accessible to L-alanine compared with the high affinity sites of D-alanine. Both the biochemical and electrophysiological results indicate that while a portion of the responses to L- and D-alanine occurs through a common receptor/transduction process, there exist independent receptor/transduction processes for the enantiomers, L- and D-alanine.