scholarly journals Multiple components of eIF4F are required for protein synthesis-dependent hippocampal long-term potentiation

2013 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Hoeffer ◽  
Emanuela Santini ◽  
Tao Ma ◽  
Elizabeth C. Arnold ◽  
Ashley M. Whelan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protein Synthesis ◽  
Synaptic Plasticity ◽  
Translation Initiation ◽  
Translational Control ◽  
Late Phase ◽  
Long Term Potentiation ◽  
Term Potentiation ◽  
General Protein Synthesis ◽  
General Protein

Persistent forms of synaptic plasticity are widely thought to require the synthesis of new proteins. This feature of long-lasting forms of plasticity largely has been demonstrated using inhibitors of general protein synthesis, such as either anisomycin or emetine. However, these drugs, which inhibit elongation, cannot address detailed questions about the regulation of translation initiation, where the majority of translational control occurs. Moreover, general protein synthesis inhibitors cannot distinguish between cap-dependent and cap-independent modes of translation initiation. In the present study, we took advantage of two novel compounds, 4EGI-1 and hippuristanol, each of which targets a different component of the eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF)4F initiation complex, and investigated their effects on long-term potentiation (LTP) at CA3-CA1 synapses in the hippocampus. We found that 4EGI-1 and hippuristanol both attenuated long-lasting late-phase LTP induced by two different stimulation paradigms. We also found that 4EGI-1 and hippuristanol each were capable of blocking the expression of newly synthesized proteins immediately after the induction of late-phase LTP. These new pharmacological tools allow for a more precise dissection of the role played by translational control pathways in synaptic plasticity and demonstrate the importance of multiple aspects of eIF4F in processes underlying hippocampal LTP, laying the foundation for future studies investigating the role of eIF4F in hippocampus-dependent memory processes.

scholarly journals Developmental regulation of the late phase of long-term potentiation (L-LTP) and metaplasticity in hippocampal area CA1 of the rat

2012 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 902-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guan Cao ◽  
Kristen M. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Synaptic Plasticity ◽  
Developmental Regulation ◽  
Late Phase ◽  
Long Term Potentiation ◽  
Excitatory Synapses ◽  
Developmentally Regulated ◽  
Area Ca1 ◽  
Term Potentiation ◽  
Hippocampal Area

Long-term potentiation (LTP) is a form of synaptic plasticity thought to underlie memory; thus knowing its developmental profile is fundamental to understanding function. Like memory, LTP has multiple phases with distinct timing and mechanisms. The late phase of LTP (L-LTP), lasting longer than 3 h, is protein synthesis dependent and involves changes in the structure and content of dendritic spines, the major sites of excitatory synapses. In previous work, tetanic stimulation first produced L-LTP at postnatal day 15 (P15) in area CA1 of rat hippocampus. Here we used a more robust induction paradigm involving theta-burst stimulation (TBS) in acute slices and found the developmental onset of L-LTP to be 3 days earlier at P12. In contrast, at P8–11, TBS only reversed the synaptic depression that occurs from test-pulse stimulation in developing (P8–15) hippocampus. A second bout of TBS delivered 30–180 min later produced L-LTP at P10–11 but not at P8–9 and enhanced L-LTP at P12–15. Both the developmental onset and the enhanced L-LTP produced by repeated bouts of TBS were blocked by the N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist dl-2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid. Thus the developmental onset age is P12 for L-LTP induced by the more robust and perhaps more naturalistic TBS induction paradigm. Metaplasticity produced by repeated bouts of TBS is developmentally regulated, advancing the capacity for L-LTP from P12 to P10, but not to younger ages. Together these findings provide a new basis from which to investigate mechanisms that regulate the developmental onset of this important form of synaptic plasticity.

scholarly journals Staufen1 Regulation of Protein Synthesis-Dependent Long-Term Potentiation and Synaptic Function in Hippocampal Pyramidal Cells

2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (9) ◽  
pp. 2896-2907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geneviève Lebeau ◽  
Marjolaine Maher-Laporte ◽  
Lisa Topolnik ◽  
Charles E. Laurent ◽  
Wayne Sossin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Synaptic Plasticity ◽  
Translational Control ◽  
Rna Binding ◽  
Long Term Potentiation ◽  
Synaptic Function ◽  
Down Regulation ◽  
Spine Shape ◽  
Term Potentiation

ABSTRACT Staufen1 (Stau1) is an RNA-binding protein involved in transport, localization, decay, and translational control of mRNA. In neurons, it is present in cell bodies and also in RNA granules which are transported along dendrites. Dendritic mRNA localization might be involved in long-term synaptic plasticity and memory. To determine the role of Stau1 in synaptic function, we examined the effects of Stau1 down-regulation in hippocampal slice cultures using small interfering RNA (siRNA). Biolistic transfection of Stau1 siRNA resulted in selective down-regulation of Stau1 in slice cultures. Consistent with a role of Stau1 in transporting mRNAs required for synaptic plasticity, Stau1 down-regulation impaired the late form of chemically induced long-term potentiation (L-LTP) without affecting early-LTP, mGluR1/5-mediated long-term depression, or basal evoked synaptic transmission. Stau1 down-regulation decreased the amplitude and frequency of miniature excitatory postsynaptic currents, suggesting a role in maintaining efficacy at hippocampal synapses. At the cellular level, Stau1 down-regulation shifted spine shape from regular to elongated spines, without changes in spine density. The change in spine shape could be rescued by an RNA interference-resistant Stau1 isoform. Therefore, Stau1 is important for processing and/or transporting in dendrites mRNAs that are critical in regulation of synaptic strength and maintenance of functional connectivity changes underlying hippocampus-dependent learning and memory.

Brivaracetam Prevents the Over-expression of Synaptic Vesicle Protein 2A and Rescues the Deficits of Hippocampal Long-term Potentiation In Vivo in Chronic Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Rats

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Xing Ge ◽  
Ying-Ying Lin ◽  
Qian-Qian Bi ◽  
Yu-Juan Chen
Keyword(s):  
Synaptic Plasticity ◽  
Temporal Lobe Epilepsy ◽  
Synaptic Vesicle ◽  
Long Term Potentiation ◽  
Synaptic Dysfunction ◽  
Over Expression ◽  
Term Potentiation ◽  
Synaptic Vesicle Protein 2A

Background: Patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) usually suffer from cognitive deficits and recurrent seizures. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a novel anti-epileptic drug (AEDs) recently used for the treatment of partial seizures with or without secondary generalization. Different from other AEDs, BRV has some favorable properties on synaptic plasticity. However, the underlying mechanisms remain elusive. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the neuroprotective mechanism of BRV on synaptic plasticity in experimental TLE rats. Methods: The effect of chronic treatment with BRV (10 mg/kg) was assessed on Pilocarpine induced TLE model through measurement of the field excitatory postsynaptic potentials (fEPSPs) in vivo. Differentially expressed synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) were identified with immunoblot. Then, fast phosphorylation of synaptosomal-associated protein 25 (SNAP-25) during long-term potentiation (LTP) induction was performed to investigate the potential roles of BRV on synaptic plasticity in the TLE model. Results: An increased level of SV2A accompanied by a depressed LTP in the hippocampus was shown in epileptic rats. Furthermore, BRV treatment continued for more than 30 days improved the over-expression of SV2A and reversed the synaptic dysfunction in epileptic rats. Additionally, BRV treatment alleviates the abnormal SNAP-25 phosphorylation at Ser187 during LTP induction in epileptic ones, which is relevant to the modulation of synaptic vesicles exocytosis and voltagegated calcium channels. Conclusion: BRV treatment ameliorated the over-expression of SV2A in the hippocampus and rescued the synaptic dysfunction in epileptic rats. These results identify the neuroprotective effect of BRV on TLE model.

Prenatal stress in rats attenuates hippocampal long-term potentiation and induces deficits in synaptic plasticity

2006 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. S52
Author(s):  
S. Salomon ◽  
Y. Nachum-Biala ◽  
Y. Bogush ◽  
M. Lineal ◽  
H. Matzner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Synaptic Plasticity ◽  
Prenatal Stress ◽  
Long Term Potentiation ◽  
Term Potentiation

scholarly journals Synaptic plasticity-dependent competition rule influences memory formation

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yire Jeong ◽  
Hye-Yeon Cho ◽  
Mujun Kim ◽  
Jung-Pyo Oh ◽  
Min Soo Kang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Synaptic Plasticity ◽  
Fear Conditioning ◽  
Long Term Potentiation ◽  
Memory Formation ◽  
Specific Pattern ◽  
Memory Encoding ◽  
Competition Rule ◽  
Term Potentiation ◽  
Input Activity

AbstractMemory is supported by a specific collection of neurons distributed in broad brain areas, an engram. Despite recent advances in identifying an engram, how the engram is created during memory formation remains elusive. To explore the relation between a specific pattern of input activity and memory allocation, here we target a sparse subset of neurons in the auditory cortex and thalamus. The synaptic inputs from these neurons to the lateral amygdala (LA) are not potentiated by fear conditioning. Using an optogenetic priming stimulus, we manipulate these synapses to be potentiated by the learning. In this condition, fear memory is preferentially encoded in the manipulated cell ensembles. This change, however, is abolished with optical long-term depression (LTD) delivered shortly after training. Conversely, delivering optical long-term potentiation (LTP) alone shortly after fear conditioning is sufficient to induce the preferential memory encoding. These results suggest a synaptic plasticity-dependent competition rule underlying memory formation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document