Glutamate receptor function in learning and memory

The contribution of glutamate to synaptic transmission, plasticity and development is well established; current evidence is based on diverse approaches to decipher function and malfunction of this principal transmitter. With respect to learning and memory, we are now able to identify more specifically the role played by the three main glutamate receptor classes in learning and memory: centre stage is clearly the NMDA receptor, with overwhelming evidence proving its involvement in the actual learning process (encoding), throughout the animal kingdom. This is discussed with respect to many different types of learning. Evidence for the contribution of the AMPA receptors (AMPARs) is less clear-cut due to the general problem of specificity: block of AMPARs will shutdown neuronal communication, and this will affect various components essential for learning. Therefore, the role of AMPARs cannot be established in isolation. Problems of interpretation are outlined and a specific involvement of AMPARs in the regulation of neuronal excitation related to learning is proposed. Metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) may contribute very little to the actual acquisition of new information. However, memory formation appears to require mGluRs, through the modulation of consolidation and/or recall. Overall, mGluR functions seem variable and dependent on brain structure and learning task.     

Metabotropic glutamate receptor subtypes mediating slow inward tail current (IADP) induction and inhibition of synaptic transmission in olfactory cortical neurones

1. The pharmacological features of the pre- and postsynaptic metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) present in the guinea-pig olfactory cortex, were examined in brain slices in vitro by use of a conventional intracellular current clamp/voltage clamp recording technique.
2. Bath-application of trans-aminocyclopentane-1,3-dicarboxylic acid (trans-ACPD) (50 μM) produced a sustained membrane depolarization, increase in cell excitability and induction of a post-stimulus inward (afterdepolarizing) tail current (I_ADP) (measured under ‘hybrid'' voltage clamp) similar to those evoked by the muscarinic receptor agonist oxotremorine-M (OXO-M, 2 μM).
3. L-Glutamate (0.25–1 mM, in the presence of 20 μM 6-cyano-7-nitroquinoxaline-2,3-dione (CNQX) and 100 μM DL-amino-5-phosphono valeric acid (DL-APV)) or the broad spectrum mGluR agonists 1S,3R-aminocyclopentane-1,3-dicarboxylic acid (1S,3R-ACPD, 10 μM), 1S,3S-ACPD (50 μM), ibotenate (Ibo; 25 μM, in the presence of 100 μM DL-APV), the selective mGluR I agonists (S)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine ((S)-3,5-DHPG, 10 μM), (S)-3-hydroxyphenylglycine ((S)-3HPG, 50 μM), or quisqualate (10 μM, in the presence of 20 μM CNQX), but not the mGluR II agonist 2S,1′S,2′S-2-(2′-carboxycyclopropyl)-glycine (L-CCGI, 1 μM) or mGluR III agonist L(+)-2-amino-4-phosphonobutyric acid (L-AP4, 1 mM), were all effective in producing membrane depolarization and inducing a post-stimulus I_ADP. Unexpectedly, the proposed mGluR II-selective agonist (2S,1′R,2′R,3′R)-2-(2′,3′-dicarboxycyclopropyl)-glycine (DCG-IV, 10 μM, in the presence of 100 μM DL-APV) was also active.
4. The excitatory effects induced by 10 μM 1S,3R-ACPD were reversibly antagonized by the mGluR I/II antagonist (+)-α-methyl-4-carboxyphenylglycine ((+)-MCPG, 0.5–1 mM), as well as the selective mGluR I antagonists (S)-4-carboxyphenylglycine ((S)-4CPG) and (S)-4-carboxy-3-hydroxyphenyl glycine ((S)-4C3HPG) (both at 1 mM), but not the nonselective mGluR antagonist L(+)-2-amino-3-phosphonopropionic acid (L-AP3, 1 mM) or the selective mGluR III antagonist (S)-α-methyl-L-AP4 (MAP4, 1 mM).
5. The excitatory postsynaptic potentials (e.p.s.ps), induced by single focal stimulation of cortical excitatory fibre tracts, were markedly reduced by 1S,3R-ACPD or L-AP4 (both at 10 μM), and by the selective mGluR II agonists (mGluR I antagonists) (S)-4CPG or (S)-4C3HPG (both at 1 mM) but not (S)-3,5-DHPG or (S)-3HPG (both at 100 μM).
6. The inhibitory effects of 1S-3R-ACPD, but not L-AP4, were reversibly blocked by (+)-MCPG (1 mM), whereas those produced by L-AP4, but not 1S,3R-ACPD, were blocked by the selective mGluR III antagonist MAP4 (1 mM).
7. It is concluded that a group I mGluR is most likely involved in mediating excitatory postsynaptic effects, whereas two distinct mGluRs (e.g. group II and III) might serve as presynaptic inhibitory autoreceptors in the guinea-pig olfactory cortex.

     

Molecular regulation of dendritic spine dynamics and their potential impact on synaptic plasticity and neurological diseases

The structure and dynamics of dendritic spines reflect the strength of synapses, which are severely affected in different brain diseases. Therefore, understanding the ultra-structure, molecular signaling mechanism(s) regulating dendritic spine dynamics is crucial. Although, since last century, dynamics of spine have been explored by several investigators in different neurological diseases, but despite countless efforts, a comprehensive understanding of the fundamental etiology and molecular signaling pathways involved in spine pathology is lacking. The purpose of this review is to provide a contextual framework of our current understanding of the molecular mechanisms of dendritic spine signaling, as well as their potential impact on different neurodegenerative and psychiatric diseases, as a format for highlighting some commonalities in function, as well as providing a format for new insights and perspectives into this critical area of research. Additionally, the potential strategies to restore spine structure–function in different diseases are also pointed out. Overall, these informations should help researchers to design new drugs to restore the structure–function of dendritic spine, a “hot site” of synaptic plasticity.     

Biallelic mutations in ELFN1 gene associated with developmental and epileptic encephalopathy and joint laxity

ELFN1, a transmembrane leucine rich repeat protein, is involved in signal transduction in both neural cells and ROD ON-bipolar synaptogenesis. We present three siblings with developmental and epileptic encephalopathy and co-morbidities due to ELFN1 gene mutation; this is the first report in literature defining the human phenotype of ELFN1 gene mutation. Clinical, electrophysiological, and radiological findings along with comprehensive genetic studies of the patients and their family members are presented. Developmental and epileptic encephalopathy, autistic features, pyramidal signs, joint laxity, and dysmorphic features are the characteristic findings of this new clinical entity, involving mainly nervous system and possibly connective tissue. Whole exome sequence analysis followed by Sanger sequencing in all family members revealed disease-causing 8 bp frameshift mutation depicted as NM_001128636.2: c.42_49delGGCCGCCA; p. (Ala15Profs*241) in ELFN1. The variant, located in the signal peptide domain in the ELFN1 gene, was found to be homozygous in three patients, and heterozygous in the parents and three healthy siblings. Segregation analysis in family members together with pathogenicity assessment tools strongly supported the damaging effect of the frameshift variant on the function of the ELFN1 protein. Mutations in ELFN1 gene may be considered in patients with neonatal and infantile-onset epileptic encephalopathy before the full clinical picture is apparent.     

The nociceptive and anti-nociceptive effects of bee venom injection and therapy: A double-edged sword

Bee venom injection as a therapy, like many other complementary and alternative medicine approaches, has been used for thousands of years to attempt to alleviate a range of diseases including arthritis. More recently, additional theraupeutic goals have been added to the list of diseases making this a critical time to evaluate the evidence for the beneficial and adverse effects of bee venom injection. Although reports of pain reduction (analgesic and antinociceptive) and anti-inflammatory effects of bee venom injection are accumulating in the literature, it is common knowledge that bee venom stings are painful and produce inflammation. In addition, a significant number of studies have been performed in the past decade highlighting that injection of bee venom and components of bee venom produce significant signs of pain or nociception, inflammation and many effects at multiple levels of immediate, acute and prolonged pain processes. This report reviews the extensive new data regarding the deleterious effects of bee venom injection in people and animals, our current understanding of the responsible underlying mechanisms and critical venom components, and provides a critical evaluation of reports of the beneficial effects of bee venom injection in people and animals and the proposed underlying mechanisms. Although further studies are required to make firm conclusions, therapeutic bee venom injection may be beneficial for some patients, but may also be harmful. This report highlights key patterns of results, critical shortcomings, and essential areas requiring further study.     

Ultrastructural relationships between cortical,thalamic, and amygdala glutamatergic inputs and group I metabotropic glutamate receptors in the rat accumbens

Changes in glutamatergic transmission in the nucleus accumbens play a key role in mediating reward‐related behaviors and addiction to psychostimulants. Glutamatergic inputs to the accumbens originate from multiple sources, including the prefrontal cortex, basolateral amygdala, and midline thalamus. The group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) are found throughout the core and shell of the nucleus accumbens, but their localization and function at specific glutamatergic synapses remain unknown. To further characterize the substrate that underlies group I mGluR functions in the accumbens, we combined anterograde tract tracing method with electron microscopy immunocytochemistry to study the ultrastructural relationships between specific glutamatergic afferents and mGluR1a‐ or mGluR5‐containing neurons in the rat nucleus accumbens. Although cortical, thalamic, and amygdala glutamatergic terminals contact both mGluR1a‐ and mGluR5‐immunoreactive dendrites and spines in the shell and core of the accumbens, they do so to varying degrees. Overall, glutamatergic terminals contact mGluR1a‐positive spines about 30% of the time, whereas they form synapses twice as frequently with mGluR5‐labeled spines. At the subsynaptic level, mGluR5 is more frequently expressed perisynaptically and closer to the edges of glutamatergic axospinous synapses than mGluR1a, suggesting a differential degree of activation of the two group I mGluRs by transmitter spillover from glutamatergic synapses in the rat accumbens. These results lay the foundation for a deeper understanding of group I mGluR‐mediated effects in the ventral striatum, and their potential therapeutic benefits in drug addiction and other neuropsychiatric changes in reward‐related behaviors. J. Comp. Neurol. 518:1315–1329, 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Enhancement of NMDA responses by group I metabotropic glutamate receptor activation in striatal neurones

1. The interactions between N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) and metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs) were investigated in striatal slices, by utilizing intracellular recordings, both in current- and voltage-clamp mode.
2. Bath-application (50 μM) or focal application of NMDA induced a transient membrane depolarization, while in the voltage-clamp mode, NMDA (50 μM) caused a transient inward current. Following bath-application of the non-selective mGluR agonist 1S,3R-aminocyclopentane-1,3-dicarboxylic acid (1S,3R-ACPD, 10 μM), NMDA responses were reversibly potentiated both in current (197±15% of control) and voltage-clamp experiments (200±18% of control).
3. Bath-application of the group I mGluR agonist (RS)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (3,5-DHPG, 10–300 μM) resulted in a dose-dependent potentiation of NMDA-induced membrane depolarization (up to 400±33% of control). This potentiation was either prevented by preincubation with (RS)-α-methyl-4-carboxyphenylglycine (RS-α-MCPG, 300 μM), or blocked when applied immediately after 3,5-DHPG wash-out.
4. Neither (2S,1′S,2′S)2-(2′-carboxycyclopropyl)glycine (L-CCG I, up to 100 μM) nor (2S,1′R,2′R,3′R)-2-(2,3-dicarboxycyclopropyl)-glycine (DCG-IV, 1 μM), agonists for group II mGluRs caused any change in NMDA responses. Likewise, L-serine-O-phosphate (L-SOP, 30 μM), agonist for group III mGluRs, did not affect the NMDA-induced depolarization.
5. The enhancement of the NMDA responses was mimicked by phorbol-12,13-diacetate (PDAc, 1 μM) which activates protein kinase C (PKC). The 3,5-DHPG-mediated potentiation of the NMDA-induced depolarization was prevented by preincubation with staurosporine (100 nM) or calphostin C (1 μM), antagonists of PKC.
6. Electrophysiological responses to α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionate (AMPA) receptor activation were not affected by agonists for the three-classes of mGluRs.
7. The present data suggest that group I mGluRs exert a positive modulatory action on NMDA responses, probably through activation of PKC. This functional interaction in the striatum appears of crucial importance in the understanding of physiological and pathological events, such as synaptic plasticity and neuronal death, respectively.

     

Inhibition of MPEP on the development of morphine antinociceptive tolerance and the biosynthesis of neuronal nitric oxide synthase in rat spinal cord

We evaluated the ability of spinally administered 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)-pyridine (MPEP), a selective antagonist of the metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 (mGluR5), and 2-chloro-5-hydroxyphenylglycine (CHPG), an mGluR5 agonist, to modulate the antinociceptive action and tolerance of intrathecal (i.t.) morphine infusion in rats, and assessed the expression of spinal nitric oxide synthase (NOS). MPEP co-infused with morphine not only preserved the analgesia and retarded the development of antinociceptive tolerance, but also partially inhibited the up-regulation of spinal nNOS protein. However, the loss of morphine antinociceptive effect and tolerance were accelerated when CHPG and morphine were co-infused, while spinal nNOS activity was significantly up-regulated. We hypothesize that activation of mGluR5 and NMDA receptors occurs after the appearance of antinociceptive tolerance to morphine. The activation of these receptors might stimulate an increased concentration of intracellular calcium and activation of PKC, which both play a vital role in the development of morphine antinociceptive tolerance and expression of spinal NOS. The synergistic effect which seems to exist between mGluRs and iGluRs may also contribute to this phenomenon.     

Modulation of glutamatergic synaptic transmission in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis

Glutamate, catecholamine and neuropeptide signaling within the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST) have all been identified as key participants in anxiety-like behaviors and behaviors related to withdrawal from exposure to substances of abuse. The BNST is thought to serve as a key relay between limbic cognitive centers and reward, stress and anxiety nuclei. Human studies and animal models have demonstrated that stressors and drugs of abuse can result in long term behavioral modifications that can culminate in psychological diseases such as addiction and post-traumatic stress disorder. The ability of catecholamines and neuropeptides to influence synaptic glutamatergic transmission (stemming from cognitive centers) within the BNST may have profound consequences over these behaviors. In this review we highlight studies examining synaptic plasticity and modulation of excitatory transmission within the BNST, emphasizing how such modulation may result in alterations in anxiety and reward related behavior.     

Dopamine receptor subtypes contribution to Homer1a induction: Insights into antipsychotic molecular action

The inducible gene Homer1a has been considered a candidate gene for schizophrenia. Drugs efficacious in schizophrenia and acting as dopamine receptor antagonists induce Homer1a expression, although the specific role of the different dopamine receptors in its induction is not completely known.