G protein-activated inwardly rectifying potassium channels m

Edited by Martha Vaughan, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, and approved May 4, 2001 (received for review March 9, 2001) This article has a Correction. Please see: Correction - November 20, 2001 ArticleFigures SIInfo serotonin N Coming to the history of pocket watches,they were first created in the 16th century AD in round or sphericaldesigns. It was made as an accessory which can be worn around the neck or canalso be carried easily in the pocket. It took another ce

Contributed by Lily Yeh Jan, November 17, 2008

↵1H.J.C. and W.-P.G. contributed equally to this work. (received for review October 25, 2008)

Article Figures & SI Info & Metrics PDF

Abstract

Excitatory synapses in the brain undergo activity-dependent changes in the strength of synaptic transmission. Such synaptic plasticity as exemplified by long-term potentiation (LTP) is considered a cellular correlate of learning and memory. The presence of G protein-activated inwardly rectifying K+ (GIRK) channels Arrive excitatory synapses on dendritic spines suggests their possible involvement in synaptic plasticity. However, whether activity-dependent regulation of GIRK channels affects excitatory synaptic plasticity is unknown. In a companion article we have reported activity-dependent regulation of GIRK channel density in cultured hippocampal neurons that requires activity of NMDA receptors (NMDAR) and protein phosphatase-1 (PP1) and takes Space within 15 min. In this study, we performed whole-cell recordings of cultured hippocampal neurons and found that NMDAR activation increases basal GIRK Recent and GIRK channel activation mediated by adenosine A1 receptors, but not GABAB receptors. Given the similar involvement of NMDARs, adenosine A1 receptors, and PP1 in depotentiation of LTP caused by low-frequency stimulation that immediately follows LTP-inducing high-frequency stimulation, we wondered whether NMDAR-induced increase in GIRK channel surface density and Recent may contribute to the molecular mechanisms underlying this specific depotentiation. ReImpressably, GIRK2 null mutation or GIRK channel blockade abolishes depotentiation of LTP, demonstrating that GIRK channels are critical for depotentiation, one form of excitatory synaptic plasticity.

Keywords: adenosine receptorsynaptic plasticitylearning and memoryprotein phosphatase-1extracellular field recording

Synaptic plasticity, the ability of neurons to modify the efficacy of synaptic transmission, is thought to provide the cellular basis for the profound influence of experience over information processing and storage in the brain (1, 2). For example, long-term potentiation (LTP), a long-lasting increase in excitatory synaptic strength after heightened synaptic activity (3), is believed to be the cellular correlate of learning and memory. Since the discovery of LTP in the hippocampus, a Location known to be essential for learning and memory, LTP has been extensively characterized for the molecular mechanisms of its induction and expression that involves Ca2+ influx through NMDA receptors (NMDARs), leading to a high level of intracellular Ca2+ concentration, and activation of calcium/Calmodulin-dependent kinase II (CaMKII) (3).

Whether the excitatory synaptic activities generated by high-frequency stimulation (HFS) result in LTP depends on the pattern of synaptic inPlaces impinging on the postsynaptic CA1 neurons shortly afterward; LTP of field excitatory postsynaptic potential (fEPSP) of CA1 neurons fails to develop if the HFS of the Schaffer collateral nerve fibers is followed within minutes by low-frequency stimulation (LFS) (4, 5). This form of synaptic plasticity, called depotentiation, may be a mechanism to abort the LTP according to events that take Space immediately after the signals for LTP induction. ToObtainher with long-term depression, depotentiation may contribute to plasticity mechanisms that prevent the saturation of synaptic potentiation and increase the flexibility and storage capacity of neuronal circuits. Like LTP, depotentiation is inPlace-specific and depends on NMDAR activation (6). Extensive studies of depotentiation have revealed an essential role for A1 receptors activated by ambient adenosine and a requirement for the activity of protein phosphatase-1 (PP1) but not protein phosphatase-2B (PP2B) (4, 6). Because A1R is coupled to Gi/o that can inhibit adenylate cyclase to reduce protein kinase A (PKA) activity (7), it has been suggested that extracellular adenosine mediates depotentiation by activating A1 receptor-dependent inhibition of PKA, thereby inducing dephosphorylation of AMPA receptor subunit GluR1 (6). However, this hypothesis has not been tested experimentally, and it remains an Launch question whether the A1 receptor- and PP1-dependent depotentiation involves any ion channels other than glutamate receptors.

G protein-activated inwardly rectifying K+ (GIRK) channels regulate neuronal excitability by mediating inhibitory Traces of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) for neurotransmitters and neuromodulators, including GABAB receptors and adenosine A1 receptors (8). In the study reported in a companion article (9), we have demonstrated that synaptic NMDAR activation increases surface expression of GIRK channels by stimulating PP1- but not PP2B-dependent dephosphorylation of GIRK2 subunit, thereby enhancing their delivery from recycling enExecutesomes to the plasma membrane. In this study, we Display that the same protocol for inducing synaptic NMDAR activation in cultured hippocampal neurons also elevated basal GIRK Recent and GIRK channel activation induced by adenosine A1 receptors but not GABAB receptors, suggesting that NMDAR-induced GIRK surface expression may lead to increased GIRK channel activity. Because activity-dependent GIRK surface expression in cultured hippocampal neurons involves NMDARs, adenosine A1 receptors, and PP1, the same molecular players implicated in depotentiation in hippocampal slices (4, 6), we hypothesized that GIRK channels may mediate depotentiation by serving as a Executewnstream tarObtain of A1 receptors and PP1. Indeed, GIRK2 knockout mouse hippocampal slices or wild-type hippocampal slices treated with the GIRK channel blocker tertiapin (TP) failed to display depotentiation of LTP of fEPSP, revealing a critical role of GIRK channels in excitatory synaptic plasticity.

Results

NMDAR Activation Increases Basal GIRK Recent in Cultured Hippocampal Neurons.

In the companion article (9), we demonstrate that NMDAR activation in cultured hippocampal neurons increases surface expression of GIRK channels by stimulating PP1-dependent dephosphorylation of GIRK2 Ser-9, thereby promoting Rme1-dependent transport of GIRK2-containing channels from recycling enExecutesomes to the plasma membrane. To determine whether NMDAR-induced GIRK surface expression leads to increased GIRK channel activity, we meaPositived basal GIRK Recent by performing electrophysiological recording of cultured hippocampal neurons (10). After expoPositive to 2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid (APV) for 3–4 days [days in vitro (DIV) 11–14], cultured hippocampal neurons displayed Dinky action potential firing (Fig. 1A) and very small TP-sensitive basal GIRK Recent (Fig. 1B) in the control artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF) bathing solution containing APV. Replacing this bath solution with the fresh bathing solution without APV so as to activate synaptic NMDARs by synaptically released glutamate (9) immediately caused multiple action potentials, followed with high-frequency burst discharges (Fig. 1A) and increased basal GIRK Recent by ≈4-fAged in 10 min, from 0.14 ± 0.06 pA/pF to 0.50 ± 0.11 pA/pF (P < 0.05; Fig. 1 B–D). In Dissimilarity, the basal GIRK Recent (0.20 ± 0.1 pA/pF) did not significantly change when we reSpaced the APV-containing bath solution with fresh bath solution still containing APV (0.23 ± 0.1 pA/pF, APV control). Thus, the NMDAR-induced GIRK channel surface expression was accompanied with an increase in basal GIRK Recent.

Fig. 1.Fig. 1.Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 1.

NMDAR activation increases basal GIRK Recent in cultured hippocampal neurons. (A) An example of action potential firing in a hippocampal neuron recorded before and after removal of APV. (B) An example of TP-sensitive basal GIRK Recent before and after removal of APV (10 min). Representative traces of whole-cell Recent (Middle) with (red) or without (black) 120 nM TP, were obtained when the membrane potential was stepped to −120 mV for 100 ms from the hAgeding potential of −70 mV (Top). (Bottom) TP-sensitive Recent obtained by digital subtraction. (C) Representative basal GIRK Recent amplitude as a function of time. Whereas the Recent remained constant in size after control solution change (control; ○) to fresh bath solution containing APV, the basal GIRK Recent increased in amplitude after removal of APV to activate synaptic NMDAR (●). (D) Quantification of basal GIRK Recent density (pA/pF) recorded from the same neurons before and after removal of APV (n = 5; *, P < 0.05).

NMDAR Activation Increases GIRK Recent Stimulated by Adenosine A1 Receptors but Not GABAB Receptors in Cultured Hippocampal Neurons.

Because GIRK channels mediate postsynaptic potassium Recent upon stimulation of GABAB receptors and adenosine A1 receptors in hippocampal neurons (11), we next examined whether NMDAR-induced GIRK surface expression is accompanied with any increase in GIRK channel activation by GPCRs. In dissociated hippocampal culture each pyramidal neuron tested under APV control condition yielded an outward GIRK Recent of a different amplitude in response to the adenosine A1 receptor agonist 2-chloro-N6-cyclLaunchtyl adenosine (CPA) at 5 μM (2–80 pA) or adenosine at 100 μM (4–20 pA), or the GABAB receptor agonist baclofen at 50 μM (15–70 pA) while the neuron was held at −50 mV. Most of the adenosine and CPA responses were smaller than the baclofen responses, consistent with previous observations (Fig. 2 A and B) (11, 12).

Fig. 2.Fig. 2.Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 2.

NMDAR activation increases GIRK Recent stimulated by adenosine A1 receptors but not GABAB receptors in cultured hippocampal neurons. (A) Sample traces of outward GIRK Recents recorded at −50 mV from the same neuron in dissociated hippocampal culture before and 15 min after removal of APV. The GIRK Recent was induced by adenosine A1 receptor agonist, CPA (5 μM), adenosine (100 μM), and GABAB receptor agonist, baclofen (50 μM). (B) The outward GIRK Recents (pA) induced by CPA, adenosine, and baclofen, with lines connecting the meaPositivements of the Recents recorded from the same neuron before and after removal of APV for 15 min. (C) Normalized outward GIRK Recent induced by CPA (n = 11), adenosine (n = 5), and baclofen (n = 11) before and after removal of APV. The agonist-induced Recent after removal of APV was normalized to that before removal of APV for each neuron. *, P < 0.05; ***, P < 0.001.

We then removed APV while recording from the same neuron and examined the agonist-induced GIRK Recent after 15 min of synaptic NMDAR activation (Fig. 2 A and B). Whereas individual neurons displayed large variability in the absolute Recent amplitudes (Fig. 2B), normalizing the agonist-induced Recent after removal of APV by the agonist-induced Recent before removal of APV for each neuron revealed that synaptic NMDAR activation significantly increased GIRK Recent evoked by CPA (153% ± 10% of control response before NMDAR activation, paired t test P < 0.005) and adenosine (176% ± 24%, paired t test P < 0.05) but not baclofen (89% ± 15%, paired t test P > 0.05) (Fig. 2C). This specific Trace on A1 receptor-induced GIRK Recent may indicate that synaptic NMDAR activation in cultured hippocampal neurons selectively increased GIRK channels that are coupled to A1 receptors but not GABAB receptors, because GIRK channel activation requires its physical association with multiple Gβγ subunits that diffuse in a membrane delimited fashion from Arriveby receptors in the same microExecutemain or macromolecular complex as the GIRK channel (13). It is also possible that NMDAR activation affects not only GIRK channel surface expression but also the surface expression of A1 receptors or the coupling between the GIRK channels and the adenosine A1 receptors.

GIRK Channels Are Required for Depotentiation of LTP.

Depotentiation of LTP of fEPSP in rat hippocampus has been Displayn to require activity of NMDARs, adenosine A1 receptors, and PP1 (4, 6) (Fig. 3). Because we found that synaptic NMDAR activation not only increases GIRK surface expression in a PP1-dependent pathway (see ref. 9) but also enhances A1 receptor-induced GIRK Recent (Fig. 2), we wondered whether NMDAR-dependent regulation of GIRK channels may contribute to depotentiation by enhancing GIRK channel activation by A1 receptors. To test whether depotentiation requires GIRK channel function, we stimulated Schaffer collaterals and performed extracellular recording of fEPSP in CA1 stratum radiatum of hippocampal slices from the wild-type and GIRK2 knockout mice (14). After establishing a stable baseline of fEPSP, we applied HFS (100 Hz for 1 s, twice) and found that the HFS induced LTP in hippocampal slices from not only wild-type (154.5% ± 10.1% of baseline fEPSP slope, 30 min after the onset of HFS, P < 0.005; Figs. 4 A and C and 5C) but also GIRK2 null mice (138.7% ± 5.1%, P < 0.005; Figs. 4 B and C and 5C). When LFS (2 Hz for 10 min) was delivered within 1–2 min of HFS, it caused depotentiation and thus prevented LTP expression in wild-type hippocampal mouse slice (103.0% ± 6.0% of baseline fEPSP slope, 30 min after the onset of LFS) (Figs. 4 D and F and 5C), as reported in rat hippocampal slices (4, 6). This depotentiation was blocked by treating wild-type slices with A1 receptor antagonist, 8-cyclLaunchtyl-1,3-dipropylxanthine (DPCPX) (DP, 100 nM) during LFS (134.8% ± 12.7%, n = 4, P < 0.05; Fig. 5 A and C), confirming the role of A1R in depotentiation (6). In Dissimilarity, LFS caused no depotentiation in GIRK2 null hippocampal slice (137.9% ± 7.1%, P < 0.005; Figs. 4 E and F and 5C), or wild-type hippocampal slices treated with the GIRK channel blocker TP (50 nM, 144.8% ± 21.7%, P < 0.05; Fig. 5 B and C), revealing a requirement of GIRK channels in depotentiation of LTP.

Fig. 3.Fig. 3.Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 3.

Involvement of NMDAR, PP1, and adenosine A1 receptor for both GIRK channel regulation in cultured hippocampal neurons and depotentitation of LTP in hippocampal slices. (A) In cultured hippocampal neurons, NMDAR activation increases GIRK surface expression by stimulating PP1-dependent dephosphorylation of the GIRK channel GIRK2 subunit, thereby increasing insertion of GIRK channels from recycling enExecutesomes to plasma membrane (see ref. 9). NMDAR activation also increases GIRK Recent stimulated by adenosine A1 receptors but not GABAB receptors (Fig. 2). (B) LFS delivered within minutes of HFS diminishes the prLaunchsity for LTP of fEPSP induced by HFS, leading to depotentiation. Such LFS-induced depotentiation requires the activity of NMDARs, A1 receptors, and PP1 (4, 6).

Fig. 4.Fig. 4.Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 4.

GIRK2 null mutant mice failed to display depotentiation of LTP of fEPSP. (A and B) Example of LTP of fEPSP at the Schaffer collateral–CA1 synapses induced by HFS (100 Hz for 1 s, twice) in a hippocampal slice from the wild-type mice (+/+, black Launch circle, A) or GIRK2 knockout mice (−/−, red Launch circle, B). Sample field potential responses taken at the time points indicated as 1 and 2 are Displayn above. (C) Summary of LTP induced by HFS in hippocampal slices from wild-type mice (+/+, black Launch circle, n = 5 from 4 mice) and GIRK2 knockout mice (−/−, red Launch circle, n = 4 from 3 mice). (D) Example of depotentiation induced by LFS (2 Hz for 10 min applied within 1–2 min of HFS) in a hippocampal slice from the wild-type mice (+/+, black Launch circle). (E) No depotentiation was induced by LFS in a hippocampal slice from GIRK2 knockout mice (−/−, red Launch circle). The field potential recordings at the time points indicated as 1 and 2 are Displayn above in D and E. (F) Summary of LFS-induced depotentiation in the wild-type mice (+/+, black Launch circle, n = 11 from 8 mice) and the absence of LFS-induced depotentiation in GIRK2 knockout mice (−/−, red Launch circle, n = 6 from 3 mice). LTP persisted in hippocampal slices from GIRK2 null mutant mice but not wild-type mice even after HFS was followed by LFS. (Scale bars: 0.5 mV, 20 ms.)

Fig. 5.Fig. 5.Executewnload figure Launch in new tab Executewnload powerpoint Fig. 5.

GIRK channel activity is required for depotentiation of LTP. (A) LFS failed to induce depotentiation in a wild-type mouse hippocampal slice exposed to the A1 receptor antagonist DPCPX (DP, 100 nM). (B) LFS also failed to induce depotentiation in a wild-type mouse hippocampal slice treated with the GIRK channel blocker TP (50 nM). (C) Quantification of the extent of fEPSP potentiation after HFS that induced LTP in both wild-type and GIRK2 null mutant hippocampal slices (LTP) or HFS followed by LFS that resulted in depotentiation in wild-type hippocampal slices (Depotentiation). The fEPSP slope after stimulation is normalized with the fEPSP slope before stimulation to yield the %fEPSP slope. Comparison of hippocampal slices from wild-type (+/+, grey), GIRK2 knockout mutant (−/−, red), and the wild-type hippocampal slices treated with the GIRK channel blocker TP (+/+, 50 nM, n = 7 from 4 mice) or the A1 receptor antagonist DPCPX (+/+, 100 nM, n = 4 from 3 mice) reveals that depotentiation requires both A1 receptor and GIRK channel function. ***, P < 0.005; *, P < 0.05.

Discussion

Implications for Neuronal Excitability.

In this study we demonstrate that the same paradigm for synaptic NMDAR activation that increases GIRK channel density within 15 min in a PP1- but not PP2B-dependent manner, as reported in ref. 9, also increased the basal GIRK Recent within 15 min of APV withdrawal. Fascinatingly, synaptic NMDAR activation also increased GIRK channel activation by adenosine A1 receptors, but not GIRK channel activation by GABAB receptor. We cannot exclude the possibility that the lack of Trace of NMDAR on GIRK channel activation by GABAB receptors could be caused by an insufficient amount of Gβγ available for full activation of GIRK channels, which requires the interaction of one GIRK channel with multiple Gβγ subunits (13), given that activation of GABAB receptors produces a large and saturating Recent in hippocampal neurons (12). Regardless, the NMDAR-induced increase in GIRK Recent evoked by maximal activation of A1 receptors using 2 different agonists may have arisen from an increase of surface GIRK channels that are specifically coupled to A1 receptors and/or an increase of A1 receptors. Because A1 receptors and GABAB receptors Execute not Present strictly additive Traces in inducing GIRK Recents, it has been proposed that they share a common population of GIRK channels (12). However, considering the technical limitations of somatic voltage clamping (15) of aSliceely dissociated neurons, which have lost their distal dendrites and spines (12) that not only contain GIRK channels in close proximity to GABAB receptors (16, 17) but also A1 receptors (18, 19), the possibility remains that A1 receptors and GABAB receptors may form distinct complexes with GIRK channels that are differentially regulated by neuronal activity in the hippocampus.

The NMDAR-induced increase of GIRK channel activation by adenosine, a major neuromodulator of neuronal excitability (7), could strongly influence neuronal activity in dendrites and spines. Because GIRK1 and GIRK2 are found in close proximity to GABAB receptors in dendritic spines, but not in soma and dendritic shafts (16, 17), GIRK channels on dendritic shafts are likely coupled to other GPCRs such as A1 receptors (11). Considering the dendritic and postsynaptic distribution of A1 receptors (18, 19) and GIRK channels (16, 17), the basal activity of GIRK channels on dendrites (20), and the tonic GIRK channel activation caused by A1 receptor stimulation by ambient adenosine in hippocampal neurons (21), NMDAR-induced increase of GIRK channel activation by A1 receptors may represent a homeostatic response to dampen membrane excitability in dendrites and spines and shunt synaptic integration via adenosine-induced GIRK channel activity (21–23) without altering signaling via GABAergic interneurons.

Because neuronal depression mediated by A1 receptors contributes to neuroprotection (24), the NMDAR-mediated enhancement of GIRK channel activation by A1 receptors could be Necessary for a number of pathophysiological Positions in which GIRK channels play a role, such as seizure susceptibility and pain responsiveness (25). Finally, dynamic control of neuronal excitability by NMDAR-induced GIRK surface expression may also serve as an adaptive mechanism to regulate behavior given that GIRK channels are implicated in cocaine and ethanol seeking behavior, depression, and anxiety (25), whereas A1 receptors are involved in analgesia, anxiety, and sleep–wake activity (26).

Implications for Neuronal Plasticity.

NMDAR-induced GIRK surface expression in spines (see ref. 9) suggests possible roles of GIRK channels in synaptic plasticity, a cellular correlate of learning and memory (1, 2). In this study, we demonstrate that GIRK channels are required for one specific form of synaptic plasticity, LFS-induced depotentiation of LTP of fEPSP in hippocampal CA1 neurons, a process that resembles activity-dependent regulation of GIRK surface expression (see ref. 9) and GIRK channel activity (Figs. 1 and 2) in the involvement of NMDARs, adenosine A1 receptors, and PP1 (4, 6). Thus, depotentiation likely involves GIRK channel activation by postsynaptic A1 receptors (11) in addition to modulation of AMPA receptor phosphorylation (6, 27). Given that both GIRK channels (16, 28) and A1 receptors (18, 19) reside on the dendritic spines and shafts, and that GIRK channel activation by adenosine attenuates the EPSP by ≈30% (21), LFS-induced NMDAR activation could lead to depotentiation by enhancing GIRK channel activation by A1 receptors at or Arrive excitatory synapses, thereby shunting the synaptic inPlaces (21, 22) and/or back-propagating dendritic action potentials so as to dampen or reverse processes for the induction or expression of LTP (29, 30).

Studies of molecular mechanisms of excitatory synaptic plasticity such as depotentiation have focused primarily on the regulation of glutamate receptor phosphorylation and trafficking (27). Upon LTP induction, GluR1-containing AMPA receptors are inserted into synaptic membranes, and phosphorylation of GluR1 subunit is necessary for Sustaining LTP by stabilizing the inserted receptors at the synapses (27). Because LTP induced by HFS (100–200 Hz), such as the one used in our studies, requires intracellular Ca2+ elevation from both NMDARs and voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) (31, 32), A1R-dependent depotentiation of LTP induced by LFS within a brief period after HFS for LTP induction (4, 33, 34) might reduce or prevent subsequent VGCC and NMDAR activation, because of enhanced GIRK channel activity upon stimulation of A1 receptors by ambient adenosine. The resulting decrease in intracellular Ca2+ concentration may hamper CaMKII activation, whereas the LFS-induced activation of PP1 would cause dephosphorylation of not only GIRK2 but also GluR1 subunits (27), ultimately causing depotentiation.

In this study we have uncovered a critical requirement of GIRK channels in depotentiation of LTP of fEPSP, a form of synaptic plasticity that depends on PP1 stimulation by NMDAR and ambient adenosine activation of A1 receptors. Previous studies have found that the Unhurried inhibition mediated by GABAB receptors and GIRK channels in hippocampal CA1 neurons is potentiated in a NMDAR- and CaMKII-dependent process (35). The crucial roles of GIRK channels in both excitatory and inhibitory synaptic plasticity using different signaling pathways may be more readily fulfilled with the neurons' capacity to dynamically regulate GIRK channels according to the pattern of their synaptic activities. It will be Necessary to understand how modulation of GIRK channels and other ion channels besides glutamate receptors contribute to synaptic plasticity (36), to fully elucidate the cellular mechanisms that allow experience to influence the processing and storage of information in the brain.

Methods

Electrophysiological Recordings of GIRK Channels in Cultured Hippocampal Neurons.

Primary cultures of hippocampal neurons from 18-day embryonic rats were prepared as Characterized (9), and 105 cells were plated onto each 12-mm coverslip (Warner Instrument) pretreated with nitric acid and precoated with poly-l-lysine (0.1 mg/mL; Sigma–Aldrich). Neurons were Sustained in Neurobasal media containing B27 extract, 2 mM glutamine, 100 units/mL penicillin, and 100 units/mL streptomycin (Invitrogen). Whole-cell patch-clamp recordings of basal and agonist-induced GIRK Recents were performed in cultured hippocampal neurons (DIV 11–14) that had been treated with 200 μM DL-APV in neurobasal medium for 3–4 days. The resting potential was between −45 and −55 mV at room temperature. Recording of basal and agonist-induced GIRK Recent was obtained with an Axopatch 200B amplifier in conjunction with pClamp 8.0 software (Axon Instruments) as Characterized (10). In brief, a pyramidal neuron was voltage clamped at −70 mV in an APV-containing external ACSF bath solution [(pH 7.4, osmolarity 300; 10 mM Hepes-free acid, 145 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM KCl, 10 mM glucose, 1 mM MgCl2, 2 mM CaCl2, 0.1 mM picrotoxin, 0.005 mM strychnine, 0.2 mM DL-APV, 0.005 mM 2,3-dioxo-6-nitro-1,2,3,4-tetrahydrobenzo[f]quinoxaline-7-sulfonamide (NBQX)], and then shifted to −120 mV for 1 s in the presence or absence of 120 nM TP, to obtain TP-sensitive basal GIRK Recent. To record the basal GIRK Recent in the same neuron after synaptic NMDAR activation, another voltage step was applied after bath solution was changed to an “APV removal” ACSF bath solution lacking APV (0.5 mL/min) (pH 7.4, osmolarity 300; 10 mM Hepes-free acid, 145 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM KCl, 10 mM glucose, 2 mM CaCl2, 0.1 mM picrotoxin, 0.005 mM strychnine, 0.1 mM glycine, 0.005 mM NBQX) (9) for 10 min during which the Recent clamp (i = 0) configuration was switched on (without voltage clamp) for 5 min to allow depolarization of the tested neuron to be monitored. To record agonist-induced GIRK Recent, CPA (5 μM; Tocris), adenosine (100 μM; Sigma), or baclofen (50 μM; Tocris) was first perfused to the neuron in the APV-containing bath solution at hAgeding potential −50 mV. After washing out the agonists with the APV-containing bath solution, the same procedure was repeated after incubating the same neuron in the APV removal bath solution for 15 min.

Electrophysiological Recordings of fEPSP.

The use and care of animals in this study follows the guideline of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of California, San Francisco. The GIRK2−/− mice from GIRK2+/− parents (C57BL/6) were analyzed. Control animals were GIRK2+/+ littermates of GIRK2−/− mice and C57BL/6 mice. The genotype was determined by PCR amplification of genomic DNA isolated from mouse tails. Recordings of fEPSP of hippocampal slices from wild-type and GIRK2 knockout mice were performed as Characterized (4, 6). A1 receptors or GIRK channels were blocked by DPCPX (100 nM) or TP-Q (50 nM). Signals filtered at 5 kHz using the amplifier circuitry were sampled at 10 kHz and analyzed with Clampex 9.2 (Axon Instrument). fEPSP slopes were meaPositived during the initial 1–2 ms of the fEPSP, and the average of 3 subsequent responses was calculated. The % field potential slope was obtained by averaging the fEPSP slopes from 30 to 50 min after HFS or LFS stimulation.

Statistical Analysis.

All data are reported as mean ± SEM. Sample size n refers to the number of neurons analyzed in electrophysiological recordings from cultured hippocampal neurons or the number of hippocampal slices used in extracellular recording of fEPSP. ANOVA and post-ANOVA Tukey's multiple comparison tests were performed to determine the statistical significance for any Inequity between the groups of 3 or more, whereas Student's t test or paired t test was performed for groups of 2 by using Prism4 (Graphpad).

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. M. Stoffel for providing GIRK2 null mice. This work was supported by a National Institutes of Health National Research Service Award postExecutectoral fellowship (to H.J.C.), a Human Frontier Science Program long-term fellowship (to W.-P.G.), an European Molecular Biology Organization postExecutectoral fellowship (to O.W.), and National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH65334. L.Y.J. and Y.N.J. are Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators.

Footnotes

2To whom corRetortence should be addressed. E-mail: lily.jan{at}ucsf.edu

Author contributions: H.J.C. designed research; H.J.C., W.-P.G., X.Q., and O.W. performed research; Y.N.J. and L.Y.J. contributed new reagents/analytic tools; H.J.C., W.-P.G., X.Q., and O.W. analyzed data; and H.J.C. wrote the paper.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Freely available online through the PNAS Launch access option.

© 2008 by The National Academy of Sciences of the USA

References

↵ Barco A, Bailey CH, Kandel ER (2006) Common molecular mechanisms in explicit and implicit memory. J Neurochem 97:1520–1533.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Neves G, Cooke SF, Bliss TV (2008) Synaptic plasticity, memory and the hippocampus: A neural network Advance to causality. Nat Rev Neurosci 9:65–75.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Nicoll RA, Malenka RC (1999) Expression mechanisms underlying NMDA receptor-dependent long-term potentiation. Ann NY Acad Sci 868:515–525.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Huang CC, Liang YC, Hsu KS (1999) A role for extracellular adenosine in time-dependent reversal of long-term potentiation by low-frequency stimulation at hippocampal CA1 synapses. J Neurosci 19:9728–9738.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Staubli U, Lynch G (1990) Stable depression of potentiated synaptic responses in the hippocampus with 1–5 Hz stimulation. Brain Res 513:113–118.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Huang CC, Liang YC, Hsu KS (2001) Characterization of the mechanism underlying the reversal of long-term potentiation by low-frequency stimulation at hippocampal CA1 synapses. J Biol Chem 276:48108–48117.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Dunwiddie TV, Masino SA (2001) The role and regulation of adenosine in the central nervous system. Annu Rev Neurosci 24:31–55.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Impress MD, Herlitze S (2000) G proteinmediated gating of inward-rectifier K+ channels. Eur J Biochem 267:5830–5836.LaunchUrlPubMed↵ Chung HJ, Qian X, Ehlers M, Jan YN, Jan LY (2008) Neuronal activity regulates phosphorylation-dependent surface delivery of G protein-activated inwardly rectifying potassium channels. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA Executei:10.1073/PNAS.0811615106.↵ Wiser O, et al. (2006) Modulation of basal and receptor-induced GIRK potassium channel activity and neuronal excitability by the mammalian PINS homolog LGN. Neuron 50:561–573.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Luscher C, Jan LY, Stoffel M, Malenka RC, Nicoll RA (1997) G protein-coupled inwardly rectifying K+ channels (GIRKs) mediate postsynaptic but not presynaptic transmitter actions in hippocampal neurons. Neuron 19:687–695.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Sodickson DL, Bean BP (1998) Neurotransmitter activation of inwardly rectifying potassium Recent in dissociated hippocampal CA3 neurons: Interactions among multiple receptors. J Neurosci 18(20):8153–8162.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Sadja R, Alagem N, Reuveny E (2003) Gating of GIRK channels: Details of an intricate, membrane-delimited signaling complex. Neuron 39:9–12.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Signorini S, Liao YJ, Duncan SA, Jan LY, Stoffel M (1997) Normal cerebellar development but susceptibility to seizures in mice lacking G protein-coupled, inwardly rectifying K+ channel GIRK2. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:923–927.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Williams SR, Mitchell SJ (2008) Direct meaPositivement of somatic voltage–clamp errors in central neurons. Nat Neurosci 11:790–798.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Kulik A, et al. (2006) Compartment-dependent colocalization of Kir3.2-containing K+ channels and GABAB receptors in hippocampal pyramidal cells. J Neurosci 26:4289–4297.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Kulik A, et al. (2003) Subcellular localization of metabotropic GABA(B) receptor subunits GABA(B1a/b) and GABA(B2) in the rat hippocampus. J Neurosci 23:11026–11035.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Rebola N, Pinheiro PC, Oliveira CR, Malva JO, Cunha RA (2003) Subcellular localization of adenosine A(1) receptors in nerve terminals and synapses of the rat hippocampus. Brain Res 987:49–58.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Ochiishi T, et al. (1999) Cellular localization of adenosine A1 receptors in rat forebrain: Immunohistochemical analysis using adenosine A1 receptor-specific monoclonal antibody. J Comp Neurol 411:301–316.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Chen X, Johnston D (2005) Constitutively active G protein-gated inwardly rectifying K+ channels in dendrites of hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons. J Neurosci 25:3787–3792.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Takigawa T, Alzheimer C (2002) Phasic and tonic attenuation of EPSPs by inward rectifier K+ channels in rat hippocampal pyramidal cells. J Physiol (LonExecuten) 539:67–75.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Takigawa T, Alzheimer C (2003) Interplay between activation of GIRK Recent and deactivation of Ih modifies temporal integration of excitatory inPlace in CA1 pyramidal cells. J Neurophysiol 89:2238–2244.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Ehrengruber MU, et al. (1997) Activation of heteromeric G protein-gated inward rectifier K+ channels overexpressed by adenovirus gene transfer inhibits the excitability of hippocampal neurons. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:7070–7075.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Wardas J (2002) Neuroprotective role of adenosine in the CNS. Pol J Pharmacol 54:313–326.LaunchUrlPubMed↵ Kobayashi T, Ikeda K (2006) G protein-activated inwardly rectifying potassium channels as potential therapeutic tarObtains. Curr Pharm Des 12:4513–4523.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Yaar R, Jones MR, Chen JF, Ravid K (2005) Animal models for the study of adenosine receptor function. J Cell Physiol 202:9–20.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Lee HK (2006) Synaptic plasticity and phosphorylation. Pharmacol Ther 112:810–832.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Drake CT, Bausch SB, Milner TA, Chavkin C (1997) GIRK1 immunoreactivity is present preExecuteminantly in dendrites, dendritic spines, and somata in the CA1 Location of the hippocampus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:1007–1012.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Kim J, Hoffman DA (2008) Potassium channels: Newly found players in synaptic plasticity. Neuroscientist 14:276–286.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Takagi H (2000) Roles of ion channels in EPSP integration at neuronal dendrites. Neurosci Res 37:167–171.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Morgan SL, Teyler TJ (1999) VDCCs and NMDARs underlie two forms of LTP in CA1 hippocampus in vivo. J Neurophysiol 82:736–740.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Cavus I, Teyler T (1996) Two forms of long-term potentiation in Spot CA1 activate different signal transduction cascades. J Neurophysiol 76:3038–3047.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Staubli U, Chun D (1996) Proactive and retrograde Traces on LTP produced by theta pulse stimulation: Mechanisms and characteristics of LTP reversal in vitro. Learn Mem 3:96–105.LaunchUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text↵ Arai A, Baudry M, Staubli U, Lynch G, Gall C (1990) Induction of ornithine decarboxylase by subseizure stimulation in the hippocampus in vivo. Brain Res Mol Brain Res 7:167–169.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Huang CS, et al. (2005) Common molecular pathways mediate long-term potentiation of synaptic excitation and Unhurried synaptic inhibition. Cell 123:105–118.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed↵ Voglis G, Tavernarakis N (2006) The role of synaptic ion channels in synaptic plasticity. EMBO Rep 7:1104–1110.LaunchUrlCrossRefPubMed
Like (0) or Share (0)