Synapses: Dividing communication, at the nanoscale
Fluorescent glutamate sensors shed light on the microscopic organization underlining spontaneous neurotransmission.
- Department of Biology, Dartmouth College, United States
Your conscious thoughts, your motivations, your most intricate movements are all built on the computational power that rest within synapses. At these sites, a transmitting presynaptic neuron sends information, in the form of chemical signals known as neurotransmitters, to a receiving postsynaptic cell. Neurotransmission begins when vesicles that store the neurotransmitters fuse with the presynaptic membrane, releasing the molecules into the space between the two neurons. These molecules are then captured by receptors on the membrane of the postsynaptic neuron, altering the activity of the receiving cell.
Most commonly, electrical signals trigger neurotransmitter release through an ‘evoked vesicle fusion’ process. Yet, in 1952 it was discovered that neurotransmission could also occur without electrical activity. This second mode of communication was given the placeholder moniker of ‘spontaneous vesicle fusion’, since its origin and use was unknown (Fatt and Katz, 1952). In fact, this process was originally assumed to be a natural consequence of imprecise molecular interactions. However, more recent evidence suggests that distinct molecular mechanisms underpin spontaneous and evoked vesicle fusion, with the two processes activating separate classes of postsynaptic receptors. This molecular segregation suggests that individual synapses could either specialize in one type of vesicle fusion, or could contain machinery and space for both evoked and spontaneous neurotransmission (Sara et al., 2011; Peled et al., 2014; Cho et al., 2015).
Recent innovations in mathematics and fluorescent microscopy have peered within the half-micron of the synaptic connection, identifying distinct nanometer arrangements of molecules that form a narrow column spanning between both sides of the synapse (Tang et al., 2016). Evoked vesicle fusion and detection takes place inside these columns, with the neurotransmitters being captured by receptors present within a carefully delineated postsynaptic nanodomain (Figure 1). Still, spontaneous fusion events cannot be detected via this approach: therefore, whether evoked and spontaneous vesicle fusion take place in the same location within synapses remains an open question.
Figure 1
Revealing the nanoscale organisation of synapses during evoked and spontaneous vesicle fusion.
Neural information is passed from a presynaptic neuron (top; purple) to a postsynaptic neuron (bottom; pink) through the release of neurotransmitters such as glutamate (green dots). These molecules are stored in the presynaptic neurons inside dedicated vesicles (purple circle) which can fuse with the membrane either spontaneously (left; blue) or evoked by an electric current (right; orange). Glutamate travels across synapses within nanoscale ‘columns’ (pale blue and pale orange) and is captured by receptors (pink) studded through the postsynaptic membrane at dedicated postsynaptic domains (PSD). GluSnFR fluorescent reporters introduced at the postsynaptic membrane, which glow when bound to glutamate (green ovals), can be used to understand the architecture of synapses. To examine what happens during evoked and spontaneous fusion, Wang et al. photobleached the GluSnFRs in the postsynaptic membrane so they could no longer fluoresce (grey ovals). Fluorescence was still observed during spontaneous fusion events, but not during evoked ones. In the postsynaptic domains of spontaneous fusion (left; pale blue column) non-bleached GluSnFRs reporters are mobile and can diffuse (blue arrows) in to these locations to replace the bleached reporters. It is possible that the actual postsynaptic receptors also do this (black arrows with question marks). However, this diffusion does not take place (orange arrows and red signs) in the postsynaptic domains of evoked fusion (pale orange column). Different rules of diffusion for GluSnFrs therefore exist within these segregated sites of neurotransmission.
An emerging method in the field of neuroscience involves inserting fluorescent reporters into the postsynaptic membrane: these reporters glow when bound to the neurotransmitter glutamate, thus allowing scientists to visualize where and when neurotransmission occurs in the brain. However, these GluSnFR molecules are likely to ‘photobleach’, becoming unable to fluoresce if exposed to too much light stimulation. Now, in eLife, Ege Kavalali and colleagues at Vanderbilt University – including Camilla Wang as first author – report having used this perceived drawback of GluSnFRs to track where spontaneous vesicle fusion occurs (Wang et al., 2022).
From a methodology standpoint, the team established a new protocol to measure spontaneous vesicle fusion with unprecedented reliability. Previously, scientists could tell when spontaneous neurotransmission was taking place by measuring the electrical activity of receiving neurons, but the technique could not determine where this process was located among thousands of synapses. Wang et al. established protocols for using glutamate sensors to tell both where and when spontaneous vesicle fusion occurs. This is a thrilling development for future experiments, especially as more stable and quantitative versions of GluSnFRs are developed to measure how much neurotransmitter is released across longer measurement times.
From a scientific standpoint, Wang et al. made a breakthrough by leaning into the high bleaching rates of the current glutamate sensor. First, neurons were electrically stimulated, and successful evoked and spontaneous events were measured at individual synapses. Then, all GluSnFRs present in the microscope’s field of view were photobleached, meaning that any emerging fluorescence would signal the presence of non-photobleached GluSnFRs migrating from other locations within the postsynaptic membrane. Spontaneous neurotransmission could still be detected under these conditions, but evoked glutamate release could not be spotted for close to an hour (Figure 1).
Paired with numerous controls, these experiments establish that most synapses support both types of fusion. In addition, they imply that these events take place at distinct locations within synapses, with GluSnFRs moving within the membrane differently within evoked and spontaneous postsynaptic nanodomains. In particular, a large fraction of GluSnFRs seems to be immobile at the postsynaptic membrane during evoked fusion, as suggested by the absence of non-photobleached reporters diffusing to these sites to replace the deactivated GluSnFRs.
Taken together, the results demonstrate that evoked and spontaneous vesicle fusion occur in discrete nanoscale postsynaptic locations, each featuring different diffusion characteristic for GluSnFRs – and, potentially, for actual postsynaptic glutamate receptors. This is further supported by prior studies which have also identified a mobile and immobile fraction of these proteins at the synapse (Heine et al., 2008; Graves et al., 2021).
Overall, the work by Wang et al. helps to fuel an intense field of study which has started to explore how brain activity and neural pathologies are rooted in the nanoscale organization of synapses (Ramsey et al., 2021; Hruska et al., 2022). More excitingly, it also offers a new experimental tool to begin investigating the neural function of spontaneous vesicle fusion.
References
-
Spontaneous subthreshold activity at motor nerve endingsThe Journal of Physiology 117:109–128.
-
Subsynaptic positioning of AMPARs by LRRTM2 controls synaptic strengthScience Advances 7:eabf3126.https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abf3126
-
Use-dependent AMPA receptor block reveals segregation of spontaneous and evoked glutamatergic neurotransmissionThe Journal of Neuroscience 31:5378–5382.https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5234-10.2011
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2022, Ralowicz and Hoppa
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 1,219
- views
-
- 181
- downloads
-
- 0
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Synapses: Dividing communication, at the nanoscale
eLife 11:e79446.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79446
Further reading
-
- Neuroscience
The concept that dimeric protein complexes in synapses can sequentially replace their subunits has been a cornerstone of Francis Crick’s 1984 hypothesis, explaining how long-term memories could be maintained in the face of short protein lifetimes. However, it is unknown whether the subunits of protein complexes that mediate memory are sequentially replaced in the brain and if this process is linked to protein lifetime. We address these issues by focusing on supercomplexes assembled by the abundant postsynaptic scaffolding protein PSD95, which plays a crucial role in memory. We used single-molecule detection, super-resolution microscopy and MINFLUX to probe the molecular composition of PSD95 supercomplexes in mice carrying genetically encoded HaloTags, eGFP, and mEoS2. We found a population of PSD95-containing supercomplexes comprised of two copies of PSD95, with a dominant 12.7 nm separation. Time-stamping of PSD95 subunits in vivo revealed that each PSD95 subunit was sequentially replaced over days and weeks. Comparison of brain regions showed subunit replacement was slowest in the cortex, where PSD95 protein lifetime is longest. Our findings reveal that protein supercomplexes within the postsynaptic density can be maintained by gradual replacement of individual subunits providing a mechanism for stable maintenance of their organization. Moreover, we extend Crick’s model by suggesting that synapses with slow subunit replacement of protein supercomplexes and long-protein lifetimes are specialized for long-term memory storage and that these synapses are highly enriched in superficial layers of the cortex where long-term memories are stored.
-
- Neuroscience
Motivation depends on dopamine, but might be modulated by acetylcholine which influences dopamine release in the striatum, and amplifies motivation in animal studies. A corresponding effect in humans would be important clinically, since anticholinergic drugs are frequently used in Parkinson’s disease, a condition that can also disrupt motivation. Reward and dopamine make us more ready to respond, as indexed by reaction times (RT), and move faster, sometimes termed vigour. These effects may be controlled by preparatory processes that can be tracked using electroencephalography (EEG). We measured vigour in a placebo-controlled, double-blinded study of trihexyphenidyl (THP), a muscarinic antagonist, with an incentivised eye movement task and EEG. Participants responded faster and with greater vigour when incentives were high, but THP blunted these motivational effects, suggesting that muscarinic receptors facilitate invigoration by reward. Preparatory EEG build-up (contingent negative variation [CNV]) was strengthened by high incentives and by muscarinic blockade, although THP reduced the incentive effect. The amplitude of preparatory activity predicted both vigour and RT, although over distinct scalp regions; frontal activity predicted vigour, whereas a larger, earlier, central component predicted RT. The incentivisation of RT was partly mediated by the CNV, though vigour was not. Moreover, the CNV mediated the drug’s effect on dampening incentives, suggesting that muscarinic receptors underlie the motivational influence on this preparatory activity. Taken together, these findings show that a muscarinic blocker impairs motivated action in healthy people, and that medial frontal preparatory neural activity mediates this for RT.
