| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Laboratory for Integrative Neuroscience, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
Submitted 4 February 2008; accepted in final form 18 May 2008
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
-aminobutyric acid release known as depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI). Using the highly reduced neuron/synaptic bouton preparation from the CA1 region of hippocampus, we have begun to examine endocannabinoid-dependent short-term depression (STD) of inhibitory synaptic transmission under well-controlled physiological and pharmacological conditions in an environment free of other cells. Application of the CB1 synthetic agonist WIN55212-2 and endogenous cannabinoids 2-AG and anandamide produced a decrease in spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic current (sIPSC) frequency and amplitude, indicating the presence of CB1 receptors at synapses in this preparation. Endocannabinoid-dependent STD is different from DSI found in hippocampal slices and the neuron/bouton preparation from basolateral amygdala (BLA) since depolarization alone was not sufficient to induce suppression of sIPSCs. However, concurrent application of the metabotropic glutamate receptor (mGluR) agonist (RS)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG) and postsynaptic depolarization resulted in a transient (30–50 s) decrease in sIPSC frequency and amplitude. Application of DHPG alone had no effect on sIPSCs. The depolarization/DHPG-induced STD was blocked by the CB1 antagonist SR141716A and the mGluR5 antagonist MPEP and was sensitive to intracellular calcium concentration. Comparing the present findings with earlier work in hippocampal slices and BLA, it appears that endocannabinoid release is less robust in isolated hippocampal neurons. |
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
; Pacher et al. 2006). The effects of cannabinoid administration are various and include alteration of many physiological and psychological processes, such as affective states, sensory perception, antinociception, concentration, and memory (Pacher et al. 2006). The psychological effects of cannabinoids are mediated mainly by activating the CB1 cannabinoid receptor, which is expressed almost ubiquitously in the brain (Herkenham 1991; Matsuda et al. 1990). One of the highest CB1 receptor densities is found in hippocampus, a brain structure associated with memory and learning, and administration of cannabinoids appears to alter memory via CB1 receptor activation (Lichtman and Martin 1996).
The central effects of cannabinoids usually involve modulation of synaptic transmission. Release of endocannabinoids from the postsynaptic neuron and retrograde activation of presynaptic CB1 receptors inhibits the release of -aminobutyric acid (GABA). Thus activation of group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs), mainly mGluR5, has been shown to suppress inhibitory neurotransmission (Ohno-Shosaku et al. 2002). In addition, depolarization of hippocampal CA1 neurons in slice produces an endocannabinoid-mediated form of short-term plasticity at GABAergic synapses: depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI) (Ohno-Shosaku et al. 2001; Pitler and Alger 1992, 1994; Wilson and Nicoll 2001). DSI is enhanced by group I mGluR activation in a cooperative manner, indicating that both pathways use common intracellular cascades (Ohno-Shosaku et al. 2002). Although the physiological significance of endocannabinoid-dependent DSI has been questioned (Hampson et al. 2003), recent studies demonstrated that DSI facilitates the induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) in hippocampus (Carlson et al. 2002).
Recently, DSI was found in a highly reduced neuron/synaptic bouton preparation from basolateral amygdala (BLA), supporting the hypothesis of retrograde endocannabinoid signaling (Zhu and Lovinger 2005). In the present study, we used a similar preparation from the CA1 region of hippocampus. Our results demonstrate that in the postsynaptic neuron/synaptic bouton preparation from hippocampal CA1 neurons, DSI could not be induced by depolarization alone. However, concurrent activation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) and postsynaptic depolarization induced an endocannabinoid-dependent form of short-term depression (STD) similar to DSI. Taken together, our results could indicate lower endocannabinoid tone in the hippocampal neuron/synaptic bouton preparation than that found in a similar preparation from BLA.
|
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
Coronal brain slices (400-µm thickness) containing hippocampus were prepared from postnatal day 14 (P14) to P17 Sprague–Dawley rats. Sections were cut with a Vibratome 1000 (Vibratome, St. Louis, MO) in cold buffer oxygenated with 95% O2-5% CO2. The slicing buffer was composed of (in mM): 124 NaCl, 3 KCl, 1.3 Mg2SO4, 2 CaCl2, 1.2 NaH2PO4, 25 NaHCO3, and 10 O glucose. Slices were maintained at room temperature for 
1 h before dissociation.
Mechanical neuronal dissociation
Single hippocampal neurons were isolated using an enzyme-free mechanical procedure, as described by Vorobjev (1991) and by Akaike and Moorhouse (2003). Briefly, the slices were transferred to a 35-mm culture dish with an external recording buffer containing (in mM): 150 NaCl, 2.5 KCl, 2.5 CaCl2, 1.0 MgCl2, 10 HEPES, 10 glucose, 0.005 2,3-dihydroxy-6-nitro-7-sulfonylbenzo[f]quinoxaline (NBQX), and 0.1 DL-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoic acid (AP-5), with pH adjusted to 7.4 and osmolarity of about 340 mOsm. A fire-polished glass micropipette was placed on the surface of the CA1 region of the hippocampus. The tip of the pipette was vibrated horizontally along the CA1 region at 30 Hz from about 2 min using a piezoelectric manipulator (LSS-3000, Burleigh/Exfo, Quebec, Canada) triggered by a Grass SD9K stimulator (Grass Technologies, West Warwick, RI). The slice was then removed and the isolated neurons were allowed to settle to the bottom of the dish for 10–15 min. The dish with neurons was placed on the stage of an inverted microscope for visualization and performance of electrophysiological recordings.
Electrophysiology
Whole cell patch-clamp recordings were made at room temperature using the conventional patch-clamp technique and an Axopatch 200B amplifier (Molecular Devices, Union City, CA). Neurons were held at –60 mV unless otherwise indicated. The extracellular solution was the same as that used during neuronal isolation. Patch pipettes had resistances of 3–5 M
after filling with a solution containing (in mM): 150 CsCl, 10 HEPES, 2 MgCl2, 0.3 Na-GTP, 3 Mg-ATP, 0.2 BAPTA, with pH adjusted to 7.23 and osmolarity of about 315 mOsm. External solution exchange was achieved by a solenoid valve perfusion system (ValveLink 16, AutoMate Scientific, San Francisco, CA) and rapid lateral movement of three-port square glass pipettes driven by a stepper motor (Fast Step system, Warner Instruments, Hamden, CT).
Data were filtered at 2 kHz and digitized at 5 kHz using pClamp 9 software and a Digidata 1320A interface (Molecular Devices). Detection of spontaneous synaptic currents was done automatically with MiniAnalysis v6.0 software (Synaptosoft, Fort Lee, NJ). The program selected all events that crossed the amplitude threshold (five- to eightfold the root-mean-square baseline noise) and had typical spontaneous inhibitory postsynaptic current (sIPSC) kinetics (Fig. 1B, asterisks). Overlapping events were also considered. Accurate detection was verified by subsequent visual inspection of current traces. All further analyses were done with Igor Pro 5 (WaveMetrics, Lake Oswego, OR) and custom-written macros. All drugs were obtained from Tocris Cookson (Ellisville, MO). When WIN55212-2 {(R)-(+)-[2,3-dihydro-5-methyl-3-(4-morpholinylmethyl)pyrrolo-(1,2,3-de)-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-1-naphthalenylmethanone}, SR141716A [N-(piperidine-1-yl)-5-(4-chlorophenyl)-1-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-methyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide hydrochloride], AEA (anandamide), or 2-AG (2-arachidonoylglycerol) were used, bovine serum albumin (BSA, 0.05%) was added to the solution as a carrier. Averaged data are presented as means ± SE; the data displayed on inter-event and amplitude histograms were usually binned using 5-s periods unless otherwise noted. Statistical comparisons between conditions were made using paired t-tests. The criterion for significance was P < 0.05.
|
Hippocampal neurons were dissociated as described earlier on poly-D-lysine (100 µg/mL in water) coated glass-bottom dishes. Neurons were fixed with 4% formaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4) for 15 min, rinsed with PBS, 0.2% Triton X-100 (PBS-T), and blocked for 1 h with 5% bovine serum albumin (BSA) in PBS-T. Rabbit anti-CB1 (1:200; Dr. K. Mackie) and goat anti-synapsin (1:500, SC #7379; Santa Cruz Biotechnology) primary antibodies were added for 2 h in PBS-T, 1% BSA at room temperature. Neurons were washed three times for 10 min in PBS-T and secondary antibodies were added individually due to species constraints. Alexa 568 donkey anti-goat secondary antibody was added first (1:1,000; Invitrogen) for 1 h and the neurons were washed three times and then incubated with Alexa 488 goat anti-rabbit secondary antibody (1:100; Invitrogen). Negative controls were processed identically except the primary antibodies were omitted. Following three final washes, cells were imaged with a Zeiss Axiovert 200 epifluorescence microscope using 480/35 excitation and 535/35 emission filters for Alexa 488 and 540/25 excitation and 605/55 emission filters for Alexa 568 with a x100 objective (numerical aperture = 1.3). Individual channels were captured with a monochrome Axiocam (Zeiss) and colors were applied using Axiovision software. Individual channels and the combined images are presented.
|
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
In addition to releasing GABA, the presynaptic terminals possessed functional CB1 receptors. Immunostaining with anti-CB1 receptor and anti-synapsin antibodies revealed the colocalization of CB1 receptor and synapsin at the presynaptic terminals (Fig. 2). Similar staining was observed in 12 cells examined. No fluorescence was detected in control cells, when the primary antibodies were omitted (data not shown).
|
|
Similarly to WIN55212-2, extracellular application of the endocannabinoid 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG; 0.5 µM) reversibly decreased the frequency of sIPSCs (Fig. 4, A and B). For a 3-min-long drug application, 2-AG produced a significant (247.6 ± 62.3% of control; n = 4; P < 0.05, paired t-test) increase in mean sIPSC inter-event interval, compared with the control level (Fig. 4B). In addition, application of 2-AG significantly decreased the sIPSC amplitude (74.4 ± 2.6% of control; n = 4, P < 0.005, paired t-test; Fig. 4, A and C). The effects of 2-AG on inter-event interval and amplitude of sIPSCs were completely reversed by application of 2 µM SR141716A (inter-event interval: 110.2 ± 17.5% of control; n = 5, P > 0.5, paired t-test; Fig. 4, D and E; amplitude: 95.2 ± 21.6% of control; n = 5, P > 0.5, paired t-test; Fig. 4, D and F).
|
and Straiker and Mackie (2005) that effects of AEA reverse more slowly than those of 2-AG even in well-washed single-neuron preparations. The effects of AEA on inter-event interval and amplitude were completely blocked by 2 µM SR141716A (inter-event interval: 102.0 ± 13.6% of control; n = 7, P > 0.5, paired t-test, Fig. 5, D and E; amplitude: 103.4 ± 6.3% of control; n = 7, P > 0.5, paired t-test, Fig. 5, D and F).
|
have shown that depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron can induce endocannabinoid-mediated DSI. Endocannabinoids are released from postsynaptic neurons by depolarization and then suppress the transmitter release through the activation of presynaptic CB1 receptors. However, in our preparation, no significant changes in either average inter-event interval (108.5 ± 16.7% of control; n = 6; P > 0.05, paired t-test) or average sIPSC amplitude (109.1 ± 10.6% of control; n = 6, P > 0.05, paired t-test) were observed even after two depolarizations (4-s duration each pulse, from –60 to 0 mV; 10-s interval) (Fig. 6A). Since the suppression of inhibitory neurotransmission by retrograde endocannabinoid signaling has also been reported with activation of group I mGluRs (Ohno-Shosaku et al. 2002), we tested the effect of the group I mGluR agonist (RS)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG) on sIPSC activity. Again, no significant changes in either inter-event interval (119.6 ± 12.6% of control; n = 6; P > 0.05, paired t-test) or sIPSC amplitude (89.0 ± 17.0% of control; n = 6; P > 0.05, paired t-test) were observed during the application of 50 µM DHPG (Fig. 6B). However, combining two depolarizations with 50 µM DHPG application resulted in an increase in inter-event interval that persisted for about 50 s (average during initial 50-s period: 194.9 ± 27.7% of control; n = 8; P < 0.05, paired t-test). No significant decrease in sIPSC amplitude (average during initial 50-s period: 76.2 ± 10.5% of control; n = 8; P > 0.05, paired t-test) (Fig. 6C) was observed following the two depolarizations in the presence of DHPG.
|
). To activate mAChRs we applied 5 µM carbachol. Carbachol treatment alone potentiated GABAergic transmission, as evidenced by a significant decrease of average sIPSC inter-event interval that persisted for about 50 s during continuous carbachol application (average during initial 50-s period: 41.9 ± 5.0 of control; n = 5, P < 0.005, paired t-test) and an increase in sIPSC amplitude (average during initial 50-s period: 127.7 ± 6.0 of control; n = 5, P < 0.05, paired t-test) (Fig. 7A). However, the combination of two depolarizations and 5 µM carbachol application, beginning after the facilitation had subsided, resulted in a 10- to 15-s-long increase of inter-event interval (average during initial 15-s period: 293.1 ± 34.4% of control; n = 5; P < 0.005, paired t-test) and a decrease in amplitude of sIPSC events (average during initial 15-s period: 59.0 ± 10.2% of control; n = 5; P < 0.05, paired t-test) (Fig. 7B). Moreover, combining two depolarizations with application of both 5 µM carbachol and 50 µM DHPG application resulted in a significant increase in inter-event interval that was longer-lasting than that observed with depolarization in the presence of either drug alone (average during initial 60-s period: 289.4 ± 66.5% of control; n = 6; P < 0.05, paired t-test). No significant changes in average sIPSC amplitude were observed over the same time period (initial 60 s: 106.2 ± 7.6% of control; n = 6; P > 0.05, paired t-test) (Fig. 7C).
|
|
|
). In our preparation, extracellular application of 5 µM N-arachidonoylphenol (AM404) resulted in a significant increase in sIPSC inter-event interval (149.2 ± 8.4% of control; n = 5; P < 0.05, paired t-test) and decrease in amplitude (82.5 ± 5.8% of control; n = 5; P < 0.05, paired t-test) (Fig. 10A). Concurrent application of 5 µM AM404 and 0.8 µM WIN55212-2 produced a significant increase in the inter-event interval (381.251 ± 46.7%; P < 0.005, paired t-test) (Fig. 10B, middle) and a decrease in the sIPSC amplitude (48.0 ± 10.0%; n = 5; P < 0.005, paired t-test) (Fig. 9, bottom) similar to that seen with application of WIN55212-2 alone (Fig. 3). This finding indicates that AM404 has little or no direct effect on CB1 receptors in this preparation. Combining AM404 (5 µM) application with the two depolarizations plus 50 µM DHPG resulted in a reversible increase in sIPSC inter-event interval (235.9 ± 43.0% of control; n = 6; P < 0.05, paired t-test) and decrease in amplitude (76.1 ± 6.7% of control; n = 6; P < 0.05, paired t-test) that persisted throughout the 3-min AM404 application (Fig. 10C). Thus application of AM404 prolongs the duration of STD.
|
; Zygmunt et al. 2000). Theoretically, activation of TRPV1 could result in postsynaptic depolarization and, as a consequence, increase of endocannabinoid release. To determine whether TRPV1 activation alters GABAergic transmission in this preparation, we applied the selective TRPV1 agonist capsaicin. A 3-min-long application of 1 µM capsaicin did not result in any significant changes in sIPSC amplitude (100.1 ± 5.1% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test) or inter-event interval (105.2 ± 16.4% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test) (data not shown). Similarly, no changes in sIPSC amplitude (95.1 ± 1.3% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test) or inter-event interval (119.9 ± 5.1% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test) were observed with 5 µM capsaicin application (Fig. 11). Thus TRPV1 activation does not mimic the effect of AM404 in the hippocampal neuron/bouton preparation.
|
; Vandevoorde and Fowler 2005). Using a selective FAAH inhibitor [3-(3-carbamoylphenyl)phenyl]-N-cyclohexylcarbamate (URB597), we tested for the possible influence of FAAH inhibition on observed STD. A 3-min-long application of 1 µM URB597 did not result in any significant changes in sIPSC amplitude (88.1 ± 3.4% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test) or inter-event interval (106.9 ± 13.3% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test). When applied together with 5 µM carbachol and two depolarizations, 1 µM URB597 did not produce any additional increase in sIPSC inter-event interval (average during 15-s period: 214.9 ± 29.9% of control; n = 9; P < 0.05, paired t-test) beyond that produced by carbachol/depolarization application (Fig. 7B). Similar to the effect of carbachol/depolarization application (Fig. 7B), the sIPSC event amplitude was significantly decreased (average during 15-s period: 76.6 ± 11.5% of control; n = 9; P < 0.05, paired t-test) (data are shown). Application of 1 µM URB597 also did not alter the effect of 50 µM DHPG/depolarization application on either sIPSC inter-event interval (average during 50-s period: 147.4 ± 12.5% of control; n = 5; P < 0.05, paired t-test) or amplitude (average during 50-s period: 118.2 ± 7.1% of control; n = 5; P > 0.05, paired t-test) (data not shown). Taken together, these results indicate that inhibition of FAAH does not influence the STD observed with muscarinic or metabotropic glutamate receptor activation. |
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
As a preparation for our study, we have chosen a highly reduced preparation consisting of a postsynaptic neuron and attached presynaptic boutons. This simple preparation has many advantages over brain slices and neuronal cultures. First, synaptic transmission observed in the neuron/bouton preparation is independent of other cells that are found in brain slices or neuronal cultures. Second, since the preparation contains only a few postsynaptic processes, it allows for more precise space clamp than other preparations. Finally, our preparation allows faster exchange of solution around the neuron and thus better control of pharmacological conditions compared with experiments in brain slices.
Presynaptic boutons on neurons from the CA1 region of hippocampus retain spontaneous GABA release (Fig. 1). Moreover, the presynaptic boutons appear to have functional CB1 receptors, as evidenced by both immunostaining and agonist actions. Staining with an anti-CB1 antibody revealed the presence of receptors colocalized with synapsin in putative presynaptic boutons. In addition, activation of CB1 receptors by the synthetic cannabinoid WIN55212-2 and endocannabinoids 2-AG and AEA (Figs. 3, 4, and 5) reversibly decreased the frequency and amplitude of sIPSCs. Comparison of effects of WIN55212-2, 2-AG, and AEA on sIPSC inter-event interval revealed that application of 0.8 µM WIN55212-2 was approximately 1.4-fold as effective as the application of 1 µM AEA and about twofold as effective as the application of 0.5 µM 2-AG. A similar trend was found in efficacy of cannabinoid compounds on sIPSC amplitude: the application of 0.8 µM WIN55212-2 was about 2.2-fold as effective as the application of 1 µM AEA and about 2.5-fold as effective as the application of 0.5 µM 2-AG. We could not accurately measure the maximal efficacies of these agonists because we did not want to use higher concentrations of the drugs that can produce nonspecific effects. However, the trend seen in comparing the efficacies of these compounds at concentrations that should produce near-maximal effects is WIN55212-2 > AEA > 2-AG. The fact that AEA was more effective than 2-AG is somewhat surprising, given that AEA acts as a weak partial agonist in some experimental settings (Guo and Ikeda 2004). However, AEA has been shown to produce efficacious inhibition of transmission in cultured neurons (Straiker and Mackie 2005) and thus there is precedent for this sort of effect. The longer-lasting effect of AEA is consistent with previous findings in isolated cells (Guo and Ikeda 2004; Straiker and Mackie 2005). It is unlikely that this prolonged effect is due to persistent binding of AEA to the CB1 receptors because these preparations are constantly superfused and thus AEA should be removed within milliseconds to seconds. There may be some aspect of the signal transduction activated by AEA that differs from that of the other agonists. The antagonist blockade of the effects of all agonists strongly supports the idea that these effects are mediated through CB1 receptors.
Although the decrease in sIPSC amplitude could be attributed to postsynaptic actions of cannabinoids and endocannabinoids, previous studies demonstrated that this effect of WIN55212-2 is observed only when multiquantal events are examined (Zhu and Lovinger 2005). In addition, previous studies confirmed the exclusive presynaptic localization of CB1 receptors, as our immunolocalization data also indicate, and the presynaptic mechanism of WIN55212-2 action (Hajos et al. 2000; Katona et al. 1999).
The decrease in amplitude of evoked IPSCs after depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron (DSI) was originally reported in hippocampal slices and subsequent studies strongly supported the hypothesis of an endocannabinoid-mediated mechanism of DSI (Pitler and Alger 1992, 1994). During acquisition of spontaneous IPSCs, DSI can be monitored as a decrease in amplitude and frequency of sIPSCs (Alger et al. 1996). Later, a similar DSI was observed in the neuron/bouton preparation from BLA (Zhu and Lovinger 2005). However, we were unable to induce simple DSI in the neuron/bouton preparation from the CA1 region of the hippocampus (Fig. 6). In addition, activation of postsynaptic mGluR5 receptors, known to trigger the release of endocannabinoids in slice (Ohno-Shosaku et al. 2002), did not change the frequency or amplitude of sIPSC events (Fig. 6). These results indicate that there is a relatively low level of endocannabinoid production or release from the postsynaptic elements of our preparation (endocannabinoid "tone") compared with hippocampal slices or neuron/bouton preparations from the BLA region. The difference in tone is also underscored by the lack of effect of CB1 antagonists/inverse agonists applied in the hippocampal neuron/bouton preparation (Fig. 3), which contrasts with the increased sIPSC frequency produced by these compounds in the same preparation from BLA (Zhu and Lovinger 2005). In both preparations these compounds appear to act as neutral antagonists (see Zhu and Lovinger 2005 for discussion of the data from BLA). Combining activation of mGluR5 receptors with postsynaptic depolarization resulted in a decrease in sIPSC frequency that lasted about 50 s (Fig. 6). This observation supports the idea of cooperativity between depolarization and mGluR5-triggered release of endocannabinoids, similar to that previously observed in the slice preparation (Ohno-Shosaku et al. 2002; Varma et al. 2001). The lack of effect of DHPG application/depolarization on sIPSC amplitude supports a presynaptic mechanism of STD.
Similar to the DSI observed in the neuron/bouton preparation from BLA, the STD in our preparation was dependent on postsynaptic intracellular calcium concentration (Fig. 8). This finding is also consistent with the proposed intracellular calcium-dependent release of endocannabinoids (Di Marzo et al. 1994).
Another similarity of STD observed in isolated hippocampal neurons with DSI is its enhancement by activation of mAChRs. It has been shown that application of carbachol enhances DSI of sIPSCs recorded in hippocampal slices, possibly by increasing the endocannabinoid release from postsynaptic elements (Kim et al. 2002). In our study, application of carbachol produced two effects. The first was a transient enhancement of sIPSC frequency and amplitude (Fig. 7A). This is reminiscent of mAChR-mediated enhancement of GABAergic transmission that has been observed in hippocampal slices, which appears to involve presynaptic mechanisms (Kim et al. 2002). Carbachol application along with depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron decreased the frequency of sIPSCs for a relatively short period of time (Fig. 7B). This effect is similar to the DSI enhancement observed in hippocampal slices, which has been attributed to actions of postsynaptic mAChRs that enhance endocannabinoid production (Kim et al. 2002). Combining DHPG, carbachol application, and postsynaptic depolarization resulted in a decrease in sIPSC frequency that was prolonged relative to effects of either agonist alone when combined with depolarization (Fig. 7C). This finding suggests that the mechanisms downstream of mAChRs and mGluRs are not completely overlapping. In hippocampal slices, mGluR5 receptor stimulation causes production of 2-AG but not anandamide (Jung et al. 2005). Conversely, muscarinic receptor stimulation in DRG neurons was found to preferentially stimulate anandamide formation (van der Stelt et al. 2005). The idea that the mechanisms of carbachol and DHPG action are nonoverlapping is also supported by the finding that DAG lipase inhibition prevents the actions of the mGluR agonist, but not the mAChR agonist (Fig. 9, B and C). DAG lipase is thought to be involved in 2-AG production within the postsynaptic neuron (Hashimotodani et al. 2008; Piomelli 2003). The increase in sIPSC event frequency and amplitude induced by carabachol alone also persisted during the intracellular application of THL (Fig. 9A), indicating the independence of muscarinic modulation pathway on DAG lipase. Our findings differ somewhat from those of Edwards et al. (2006) who observed a role for DAG lipase in mAChR-induced endocannabinoid production. This difference may have to do with the dependence on depolarization that works via a DAG lipase-independent pathway, as suggested by Edwards et al. (2006).
Our findings with the FAAH inhibitor URB597 suggest that anandamide does not play a role in STD produced by depolarization plus either of the receptor antagonists. Thus 2-AG may yet prove to be the endocannabinoid that mediates STD produced by carbachol plus depolarization. The lack of effect of DAG lipase inhibition on this carbachol action may indicate that this form of STD involves "mobilization" of preexisting endocannabinoid, similar to that proposed by Edwards et al. (2006).
Interestingly, although the application of carbachol and depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron significantly decreased the sIPSC amplitude, the combination of DHPG, carbachol application, and postsynaptic depolarization did not affect the sIPSC amplitude. The reduction of sIPSC amplitude in the presence of carbachol and depolarization could indicate the involvement of some postsynaptic mechanisms coupled to muscarinic receptors and affecting the activation of postsynaptic GABAA receptors. In addition, other postsynaptic mechanisms responsible for the reduction of sIPSC amplitude in the presence of carbachol and depolarization could be activated. For example, anandamide production stimulated by the muscarinic receptor activation could possibly increase the intracellular calcium mobilization by activation of the postsynaptic vanilloid receptor type I (TRPV1) (De Petrocellis and Di Marzo 2005; Karai et al. 2004; Olah et al. 2001; Zygmunt et al. 1999). The increase in intracellular calcium concentration could possibly decrease sIPSC amplitude. This indirect effect of muscarinic receptor activation on sIPSC amplitude might be diminished in the presence of DHPG, which increases the postsynaptic production of 2-AG and does not appear to activate the TRPV1 receptor (Zygmunt et al. 1999). However, the TRPV1-related modulation of sIPSC event amplitude is unlikely to occur in our preparation because the selective TRPV1 agonist capsaicin did not decrease sIPSC amplitude. Furthermore, anandamide did not alter sIPSCs when applied in the presence of a CB1 antagonist (Fig. 5). This lack of effect indicates that this known TRPV1 agonist has no CB1-independent (i.e., no TRPV1-mediated) effect on GABAergic transmission in this preparation.
Extracellular application of the endocannabinoid transport inhibitor AM404 transiently decreased sIPSC frequency and amplitude (Fig. 10A), which is consistent with the previously published results of Wilson and Nicoll (2001), in which extracellularly applied AM404 decreased the amplitude of evoked IPSCs. This effect is presumed to occur via the accumulation of endocannabinoids at synapses due to decreased cellular uptake (Wilson and Nicoll 2001), although other mechanisms such as stimulation of TRPV1 receptors or inhibition of FAAH could also be involved (Vandevoorde and Fowler 2005; Zygmunt et al. 2000). As mentioned earlier, application of the selective TRPV1 agonist capsaicin did not affect the amplitude or frequency of sIPSCs in our preparation (Fig. 11), indicating that the actions of AM404 that we have observed are most likely not mediated by actions at TRPV1. In addition, the lack of effect of the FAAH inhibitor URB597 indicates that the AM404 effects are not due to inhibition of this enzyme.
Accumulation of endocannabinoids in the synapse could also account for the prolonged decrease in frequency and amplitude of sIPSCs during depolarization/DHPG-induced STD and application of AM404 (Fig. 10C). The observation that AM404 prolongs endocannabinoid effects in the neuron/bouton preparation indicates that molecules involved in terminating the endocannabinoid signal (e.g., a membrane transporter) are present in neuronal elements at these inhibitory synapses.
The reasons for the difference in endocannabinoid tone and ease of DSI induction between the hippocampal neuron/bouton preparation and the slice preparation are not yet clear. It is possible that cellular elements other than the postsynaptic neuron and the presynaptic terminal regulate endocannabinoid production in the slice preparation. Differences in resting or depolarization-activated postsynaptic intracellular calcium levels could also play a role in setting the endocannabinoid tone and stimulated production. It is surprising in this regard that DSI was easily evoked by depolarization in the neuron/bouton preparation from BLA (Zhu and Lovinger 2005). However, this might reflect differences in glutamatergic action in the two brain regions. We observed evidence of glutamatergic transmission in the BLA preparation (Zhu and Lovinger 2005), but not in the hippocampal neurons examined at present. Determining the factors that regulate endocannabinoid production and release in the different preparations and brain regions may lead us to a better understanding of the mechanisms that are necessary for this retrograde signaling system.
To conclude, similarly to the previously reported DSI in the isolated neuron/presynaptic bouton preparation from BLA, the STD observed in the hippocampal neuron/bouton preparation was dependent on retrograde endocannabinoid signaling and sensitive to the postsynaptic intracellular calcium concentration. In contrast to DSI in a similar preparation from BLA, STD in hippocampal neuron/boutons required much stronger stimulation to elicit endocannabinoid release (i.e., both depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron and activation of mGluR5 receptors). The main finding of the present study is that the level of endocannabinoids available for release ("endocannabinoid tone") is much lower in the isolated hippocampal neuron/bouton preparation compared with that of a similar preparation from BLA, and this difference could explain the requirement of both postsynaptic mGluR5 and postsynaptic depolarization for STD induction in hippocampal preparation. These findings support the idea that cooperativity between these mechanisms can serve as a regulatory mechanism for cannabinoid signaling under conditions in which a low level of endocannabinoids is available for release. This sort of cooperative regulatory mechanism has the capacity to regulate the activity of the neuronal networks, particularly under conditions of high levels of released glutamate ("glutamate spillover") (Kullmann and Asztely 1998).
|
|
GRANTS |
|---|
|
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: D. M. Lovinger, Laboratory for Integrative Neuroscience, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Fishers/TS-13, Bethesda, MD 20892-8115 (E-mail: lovindav{at}mail.nih.gov)
|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
Alger BE, Pitler TA, Wagner JJ, Martin LA, Morishita W, Kirov SA, Lenz RA. Retrograde signalling in depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition in rat hippocampal CA1 cells. J Physiol 496: 197–209, 1996.
Carlson G, Wang Y, Alger BE. Endocannabinoids facilitate the induction of LTP in the hippocampus. Nat Neurosci 5: 723–724, 2002.[Web of Science][Medline]
De Petrocellis L, Bisogno T, Davis JB, Pertwee RG, Di Marzo V. Overlap between the ligand recognition properties of the anandamide transporter and the VR1 vanilloid receptor: inhibitors of anandamide uptake with negligible capsaicin-like activity. FEBS Lett 483: 52–56, 2000.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
De Petrocellis L, Di Marzo V. Lipids as regulators of the activity of transient receptor potential type V1 (TRPV1) channels. Life Sci 77: 1651–1666, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Di Marzo V, Fontana A, Cadas H, Schinelli S, Cimino G, Schwartz JC, Piomelli D. Formation and inactivation of endogenous cannabinoid anandamide in central neurons. Nature 372: 686–691, 1994.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Edwards DA, Kim J, Alger BE. Multiple mechanisms of endocannabinoid response initiation in hippocampus. J Neurophysiol 95: 67–75, 2006.
Glaser ST, Abumrad NA, Fatade F, Kaczocha M, Studholme KM, Deutsch DG. Evidence against the presence of an anandamide transporter. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 4269–4274, 2003.
Guo J, Ikeda SR. Endocannabinoids modulate N-type calcium channels and G-protein-coupled inwardly rectifying potassium channels via CB1 cannabinoid receptors heterologously expressed in mammalian neurons. Mol Pharmacol 65: 665–674, 2004.
Hajos N, Katona I, Naiem SS, MacKie K, Ledent C, Mody I, Freund TF. Cannabinoids inhibit hippocampal GABAergic transmission and network oscillations. Eur J Neurosci 12: 3239–3249, 2000.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Hampson RE, Zhuang SY, Weiner JL, Deadwyler SA. Functional significance of cannabinoid-mediated, depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition (DSI) in the hippocampus. J Neurophysiol 90: 55–64, 2003.
Hashimotodani Y, Ohno-Shosaku T, Maejima T, Fukami K, Kano M. Pharmacological evidence for the involvement of diacylglycerol lipase in depolarization-induced endocannabinoid release. Neuropharmacology 54: 58–67, 2008.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Herkenham M. Characterization and localization of cannabinoid receptors in brain: an in vitro technique using slide-mounted tissue sections. NIDA Res Monogr 112: 129–145, 1991.[Medline]
Jung KM, Mangieri R, Stapleton C, Kim J, Fegley D, Wallace M, Mackie K, Piomelli D. Stimulation of endocannabinoid formation in brain slice cultures through activation of group I metabotropic glutamate receptors. Mol Pharmacol 68: 1196–1202, 2005.
Karai LJ, Russell JT, Iadarola MJ, Olah Z. Vanilloid receptor 1 regulates multiple calcium compartments and contributes to Ca2+-induced Ca2+ release in sensory neurons. J Biol Chem 279: 16377–16387, 2004.
Katona I, Sperlagh B, Sik A, Kafalvi A, Vizi ES, Mackie K, Freund TF. Presynaptically located CB1 cannabinoid receptors regulate GABA release from axon terminals of specific hippocampal interneurons. J Neurosci 19: 4544–4558, 1999.
Kim J, Isokawa M, Ledent C, Alger BE. Activation of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors enhances the release of endogenous cannabinoids in the hippocampus. J Neurosci 22: 10182–10191, 2002.
Kullmann DM, Asztely F. Extrasynaptic glutamate spillover in the hippocampus: evidence and implications. Trends Neurosci 21: 8–14, 1998.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Lichtman AH, Martin BR. Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol impairs spatial memory through a cannabinoid receptor mechanism. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 126: 125–131, 1996.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mackie K. Cannabinoid receptors as therapeutic targets. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 46: 101–122, 2006.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Matsuda LA, Lolait SJ, Brownstein MJ, Young AC, Bonner TI. Structure of a cannabinoid receptor and functional expression of the cloned cDNA. Nature 346: 561–564, 1990.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Ohno-Shosaku T, Maejima T, Kano M. Endogenous cannabinoids mediate retrograde signals from depolarized postsynaptic neurons to presynaptic terminals. Neuron 29: 729–738, 2001.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Ohno-Shosaku T, Shosaku J, Tsubokawa H, Kano M. Cooperative endocannabinoid production by neuronal depolarization and group I metabotropic glutamate receptor activation. Eur J Neurosci 15: 953–961, 2002.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Olah Z, Karai L, Iadarola MJ. Anandamide activates vanilloid receptor 1 (VR1) at acidic pH in dorsal root ganglia neurons and cells ectopically expressing VR1. J Biol Chem 276: 31163–31170, 2001.
Pacher P, Batkai S, Kunos G. The endocannabinoid system as an emerging target of pharmacotherapy. Pharmacol Rev 58: 389–462, 2006.
Piomelli D. The molecular logic of endocannabinoid signalling. Nat Rev Neurosci 4: 873–884, 2003.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Pitler TA, Alger BE. Postsynaptic spike firing reduces synaptic GABAA responses in hippocampal pyramidal cells. J Neurosci 12: 4122–4132, 1992.[Abstract]
Pitler TA, Alger BE. Depolarization-induced suppression of GABAergic inhibition in rat hippocampal pyramidal cells: G protein involvement in a presynaptic mechanism. Neuron 13: 1447–1455, 1994.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Straiker A, Mackie K. Depolarization-induced suppression of excitation in murine autaptic hippocampal neurones. J Physiol 569: 501–517, 2005.
van der Stelt M, Trevisani M, Vellani V, De Petrocellis L, Schiano Moriello A, Campi B, McNaughton P, Geppetti P, Di Marzo V. Anandamide acts as an intracellular messenger amplifying Ca2+ influx via TRPV1 channels. EMBO J 24: 3026–3037, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Vandevoorde S, Fowler CJ. Inhibition of fatty acid amide hydrolase and monoacylglycerol lipase by the anandamide uptake inhibitor VDM11: evidence that VDM11 acts as an FAAH substrate. Br J Pharmacol 145: 885–893, 2005.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Varma N, Carlson GC, Ledent C, Alger BE. Metabotropic glutamate receptors drive the endocannabinoid system in hippocampus. J Neurosci 21: RC188, 2001.
Vorobjev VS. Vibrodissociation of sliced mammalian nervous tissue. J Neurosci Methods 38: 145–150, 1991.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Wilson RI, Nicoll RA. Endogenous cannabinoids mediate retrograde signalling at hippocampal synapses. Nature 410: 588–592, 2001.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Zhu PJ, Lovinger DM. Retrograde endocannabinoid signaling in a postsynaptic neuron/synaptic bouton preparation from basolateral amygdala. J Neurosci 25: 6199–6207, 2005.
Zygmunt PM, Chuang H, Movahed P, Julius D, Hogestatt ED. The anandamide transport inhibitor AM404 activates vanilloid receptors. Eur J Pharmacol 396: 39–42, 2000.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Zygmunt PM, Petersson J, Andersson DA, Chuang H, Sorgard M, Di Marzo V, Julius D, Hogestatt ED. Vanilloid receptors on sensory nerves mediate the vasodilator action of anandamide. Nature 400: 452–457, 1999.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
