AGAP1/AP-3-dependent endocytic recycling of M5 muscarinic receptors promotes dopamine release

Emerging approaches for treatment of schizophrenia: modulation of cholinergic signaling

Currently available therapeutic agents for treatment of schizophrenia target signaling by monoaminergic neurotransmitters; however, these treatments do not adequately treat the range of symptoms observed in patients. While these therapies treat the positive symptoms, they do not have efficacy in treating the negative symptoms and cognitive deficits that are associated with the disease. Evidence suggests that molecules that modulate signaling by the neurotransmitter acetylcholine (ACh) could provide a more comprehensive treatment of schizophrenia than currently prescribed antipsychotics. Molecules that broadly increase ACh-signaling have been demonstrated to have efficacy in treating numerous symptom clusters in schizophrenia patients. Unfortunately, these compounds induce adverse effects via activation of peripheral receptors that limit their clinical utility. One proposed strategy for retaining the efficacy of cholinergic treatments, without the adverse effects, is to target specific cholinergic receptor subtypes in the brain. Several cholinergic receptors are able to modulate brain circuits that are dysregulated in schizophrenia patients including receptors belonging to both the muscarinic family (i.e., M1, M4, and M5), and the nicotinic family (i.e., α7, α4β2). Recently, great strides have been made in developing small molecules with high specificity for these receptors, and several of these novel molecules have robust efficacy in several preclinical models predictive of both anti-psychotic and pro-cognitive effectiveness. Promising studies suggest that targeting M1 and α7 may be beneficial for pro-cognitive effects, while molecules that target M4 may be ideally suited to address the positive symptoms. Since these receptor subtypes are distinct from those responsible for the adverse effects observed with non-selective cholinergic treatments, there is hope that molecules targeting these receptors could provide novel therapeutics. Further research is needed to examine the utility of such compounds as therapeutics that could be used either alone, or in combination with existing medications, to better treat schizophrenia.

ArfGAP1 function in COPI mediated membrane traffic: currently debated models and comparison to other coat-binding ArfGAPs

The ArfGAPs are a family of proteins containing an ArfGAP catalytic domain that induces the hydrolysis of GTP bound to the small guanine nucleotide binding-protein ADP-ribosylation factor (Arf). Functional models for Arfs, which are regulators of membrane traffic, are based on the idea that guanine nucleotide-binding proteins function as switches: Arf with GTP bound is active and binds to effector proteins; the conversion of GTP to GDP inactivates Arf. The cellular activities of ArfGAPs have been examined primarily as regulatory proteins that inactivate Arf; however, Arf function in membrane traffic does not strictly adhere to the concept of a simple switch, adding complexity to models explaining the role of ArfGAPs. Here, we review the literature addressing the function Arf and ArfGAP1 in COPI mediated transport, focusing on two critical and integrated functions of membrane traffic, cargo sorting and vesicle coat polymerization. We briefly discuss other ArfGAPs that may have similar function in Arf-dependent membrane traffic outside the ER-Golgi.

AP-3 regulates PAR1 ubiquitin-independent MVB/lysosomal sorting via an ALIX-mediated pathway

A GPCR ubiquitin-independent MVB/lysosomal sorting pathway is regulated by the adaptor protein complex-3 (AP-3) and ALIX, a noncanonical ESCRT component. AP-3 binds to a PAR1 C-tail–localized, tyrosine-based motif and mediates PAR1 lysosomal degradation. AP-3 also facilitates PAR1 interaction with ALIX, suggesting that AP-3 functions before PAR1 engagement of ALIX and MVB/lysosomal sorting.

The sorting of signaling receptors within the endocytic system is important for appropriate cellular responses. After activation, receptors are trafficked to early endosomes and either recycled or sorted to lysosomes and degraded. Most receptors trafficked to lysosomes are modified with ubiquitin and recruited into an endosomal subdomain enriched in hepatocyte growth factor–regulated tyrosine kinase substrate (HRS), a ubiquitin-binding component of the endosomal-sorting complex required for transport (ESCRT) machinery, and then sorted into intraluminal vesicles (ILVs) of multivesicular bodies (MVBs)/lysosomes. However, not all receptors use ubiquitin or the canonical ESCRT machinery to sort to MVBs/lysosomes. This is exemplified by protease-activated receptor-1 (PAR1), a G protein–coupled receptor for thrombin, which sorts to lysosomes independent of ubiquitination and HRS. We recently showed that the adaptor protein ALIX binds to PAR1, recruits ESCRT-III, and mediates receptor sorting to ILVs of MVBs. However, the mechanism that initiates PAR1 sorting at the early endosome is not known. We now report that the adaptor protein complex-3 (AP-3) regulates PAR1 ubiquitin-independent sorting to MVBs through an ALIX-dependent pathway. AP-3 binds to a PAR1 cytoplasmic tail–localized tyrosine-based motif and mediates PAR1 lysosomal degradation independent of ubiquitination. Moreover, AP-3 facilitates PAR1 interaction with ALIX, suggesting that AP-3 functions before PAR1 engagement of ALIX and MVB/lysosomal sorting.

Regulation of striatal dopamine release by presynaptic auto- and heteroreceptors

Striatal dopamine neurotransmission is critical for normal voluntary movement, affect and cognition. Dysfunctions of its regulation are implicated in a broad range of behaviors and disorders including Parkinson's disease, schizophrenia and drug abuse. Extracellular dopamine levels result from a dynamic equilibrium between release and reuptake by dopaminergic terminals. Both processes are regulated by multiple mechanisms. Here we review data characterizing how dopamine levels are regulated by presynaptic autoreceptors and heteroreceptors, an area intensively investigated due to advances in real time electrochemical detection of extracellular dopamine, i.e., fast-scan cyclic voltammetry and amperometry, and the development of mutant mouse lines with deletions for specific receptors.

Muscarinic receptor trafficking

Knowledge of the mechanisms responsible for the trafficking of neurotransmitter receptors away from the cell surface is of obvious importance in understanding what regulates their expression and function. This chapter will focus on the mechanisms responsible for the internalization and degradation of muscarinic receptors. There are both receptor subtype-specific and cell-type specific differences in muscarinic receptor trafficking. Studies on muscarinic receptor trafficking both in cells in culture and in vivo will be described, and the potential physiological consequences of this trafficking will be discussed.

Microscopic binding of M5 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor with antagonists by homology modeling, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics simulation

By performing homology modeling, molecular docking, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, we have developed three-dimensional (3D) structural models of the M5 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR) and two complexes for M5 mAChR binding with antagonists SVT-40776 and solifenacin in the environment of lipid bilayer and solvent water. According to the simulated results, each of the antagonists is oriented horizontally in the binding pocket formed by transmembrane helices 2, 3, and 5-7. The cationic headgroup of each of the antagonists interacts with a negatively charged residue, Asp110, through electrostatic and hydrogen-bonding interactions. The simulated results also reveal some significant difference between the binding modes of SVT-40776 and solifenacin. In particular, SVT-40776 is persistently hydrogen bonded with the side chain of residue Tyr458, whereas solifenacin cannot form a similar hydrogen bond with residues around its carbonyl group. Such significant difference in the binding structures is consistent with the fact that SVT-40776 has a much higher binding affinity (K(d) = 0.4 nM) to M5 mAChR than that of solifenacin (K(d) = 31 nM) with the same reeptor. The calculated binding free energy change (-2.3 ± 0.3 kcal/mol) from solifenacin to SVT-40776 is in good agreement with the experimentally derived binding free energy change (-2.58 kcal/mol), suggesting that our modeled M5 mAChR structure and its complexes with the antagonists are reliable. The new structural insights obtained from this computational study are expected to stimulate further biochemical and pharmacological studies on the detailed structures of M5 and other subtypes of mAChRs.

Dopamine release in the basal ganglia

Dopamine (DA) is a key transmitter in the basal ganglia, yet DA transmission does not conform to several aspects of the classic synaptic doctrine. Axonal DA release occurs through vesicular exocytosis and is action potential- and Ca²⁺-dependent. However, in addition to axonal release, DA neurons in midbrain exhibit somatodendritic release by an incompletely understood, but apparently exocytotic, mechanism. Even in striatum, axonal release sites are controversial, with evidence for DA varicosities that lack postsynaptic specialization, and largely extrasynaptic DA receptors and transporters. Moreover, DA release is often assumed to reflect a global response to a population of activities in midbrain DA neurons, whether tonic or phasic, with precise timing and specificity of action governed by other basal ganglia circuits. This view has been reinforced by anatomical evidence showing dense axonal DA arbors throughout striatum, and a lattice network formed by DA axons and glutamatergic input from cortex and thalamus. Nonetheless, localized DA transients are seen in vivo using voltammetric methods with high spatial and temporal resolution. Mechanistic studies using similar methods in vitro have revealed local regulation of DA release by other transmitters and modulators, as well as by proteins known to be disrupted in Parkinson's disease and other movement disorders. Notably, the actions of most other striatal transmitters on DA release also do not conform to the synaptic doctrine, with the absence of direct synaptic contacts for glutamate, GABA, and acetylcholine (ACh) on striatal DA axons. Overall, the findings reviewed here indicate that DA signaling in the basal ganglia is sculpted by cooperation between the timing and pattern of DA input and those of local regulatory factors.

ArfGAP1 promotes COPI vesicle formation by facilitating coatomer polymerization

The role of ArfGAP1 in COPI vesicle biogenesis has been controversial. In work using isolated Golgi membranes, ArfGAP1 was found to promote COPI vesicle formation. In contrast, in studies using large unilamellar vesicles (LUVs) as model membranes, ArfGAP1 functioned as an uncoating factor inhibiting COPI vesicle formation. We set out to discriminate between these models. First, we reexamined the effect of ArfGAP1 on LUVs. We found that ArfGAP1 increased the efficiency of coatomer-induced deformation of LUVs. Second, ArfGAP1 and peptides from cargo facilitated self-assembly of coatomer into spherical structures in the absence of membranes, reminiscent of clathrin self-assembly. Third, in vivo, ArfGAP1 overexpression induced the accumulation of vesicles and allowed normal trafficking of a COPI cargo. Taken together, these data support the model in which ArfGAP1 promotes COPI vesicle formation and membrane traffic and identify a function for ArfGAP1 in the assembly of coatomer into COPI.

Dopamine signaling in dorsal versus ventral striatum: the dynamic role of cholinergic interneurons

Mesostriatal dopaminergic neurons and striatal cholinergic interneurons participate in signaling the motivational significance of environmental stimuli and regulate striatal plasticity. Dopamine (DA) and acetylcholine (ACh) have potent interactions within the striatum at multiple levels that include presynaptic regulation of neurotransmitter release and postsynaptic effects in target cells (including ACh neurons). These interactions may be highly variable given the dynamic changes in the firing activities of parent DA and ACh neurons. Here, we consider how striatal ACh released from cholinergic interneurons acting at both nicotinic and muscarinic ACh receptors powerfully modulates DA transmission. This ACh–DA interaction varies in a manner that depends on the frequency of presynaptic activation, and will thus strongly influence how DA synapses convey discrete changes in DA neuron activity that are known to signal events of motivational salience. Furthermore, this ACh modulation of DA transmission within striatum occurs via different profiles of nicotinic and muscarinic receptors in caudate–putamen compared to nucleus accumbens, which may ultimately enable region-specific targeting of striatal function.

How addictive drugs disrupt presynaptic dopamine neurotransmission

The fundamental principle that unites addictive drugs appears to be that each enhances synaptic dopamine by means that dissociate it from normal behavioral control, so that they act to reinforce their own acquisition. This occurs via the modulation of synaptic mechanisms that can be involved in learning, including enhanced excitation or disinhibition of dopamine neuron activity, blockade of dopamine reuptake, and altering the state of the presynaptic terminal to enhance evoked over basal transmission. Amphetamines offer an exception to such modulation in that they combine multiple effects to produce nonexocytic stimulation-independent release of neurotransmitter via reverse transport independent from normal presynaptic function. Questions about the molecular actions of addictive drugs, prominently including the actions of alcohol and solvents, remain unresolved, but their ability to co-opt normal presynaptic functions helps to explain why treatment for addiction has been challenging.