J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 46, 32647-32654, November 12, 1999
Functional Roles of the Extracellular Segments of the Sodium
Channel
Subunit in Voltage-dependent Gating and
Modulation by
1 Subunits*
Yusheng
Qu,
John C.
Rogers,
Shuo-Fu
Chen,
Kimberly A.
McCormick,
Todd
Scheuer, and
William A.
Catterall
From the Department of Pharmacology, University of Washington,
Seattle, Washington 98195-7280
 |
ABSTRACT |
Voltage-gated sodium channels consist of a
pore-forming
subunit associated with
1 subunits and, for brain
sodium channels,
2 subunits. Although much is known about the
structure and function of the
subunit, there is little information
on the functional role of the 16 extracellular loops. To search for
potential functional activities of these extracellular segments,
chimeras were studied in which an individual extracellular loop of the
rat heart (rH1)
subunit was substituted for the corresponding
segment of the rat brain type IIA (rIIA)
subunit. In comparison
with rH1, wild-type rIIA
subunits are characterized by more
positive voltage-dependent activation and inactivation, a
more prominent slow gating mode, and a more substantial shift to the
fast gating mode upon coexpression of
1 subunits in
Xenopus oocytes. When
subunits were expressed alone,
chimeras with substitutions from rH1 in five extracellular loops
(IIS5-SS1, IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, IIISS2-S6, and IVS3-S4) had negatively
shifted activation, and chimeras with substitutions in three of these
(IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4) also had negatively shifted
steady-state inactivation. rIIA
subunit chimeras with substitutions
from rH1 in five extracellular loops (IS5-SS1, ISS2-S6, IISS2-S6,
IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4) favored the fast gating mode. Like wild-type
rIIA
subunits, all of the chimeric rIIA
subunits except chimera
IVSS2-S6 were shifted almost entirely to the fast gating mode when
coexpressed with
1 subunits. In contrast, substitution of
extracellular loop IVSS2-S6 substantially reduced the effectiveness of
1 subunits in shifting rIIA
subunits to the fast gating mode.
Our results show that multiple extracellular loops influence voltage-dependent activation and inactivation and gating
mode of sodium channels, whereas segment IVSS2-S6 plays a dominant role
in modulation of gating by
1 subunits. Evidently, several extracellular loops are important determinants of sodium channel gating
and modulation.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Voltage-gated sodium channels mediate the sodium conductance
responsible for the rapidly rising phase of the action potential in
nerve and muscle cells. The major form of the sodium channel in rat
brain is a heterotrimeric complex of an
subunit (260 kDa), a
noncovalently bound
1 subunit (36 kDa), and a disulfide-linked
2
subunit (33 kDa) (1, 2).
subunits can function as voltage-gated ion
channels by themselves (e.g. rat brain type II/IIA; Refs. 3
and 4). They are composed of four homologous domains (I-IV), which
each contain six probable
-helical transmembrane segments (S1-S6)
and an additional membrane-associated pore loop (e.g. rat
brain type II/IIA; Refs. 5-7), whereas the
1 and
2 subunits are
single membrane-spanning glycoproteins with a large extracellular domain and a small intracellular domain (8, 9). Extensive structure-function analyses of
subunits have shown that the S4
transmembrane segments in each domain serve as voltage sensors for
channel activation; the S5 and S6 segments and the pore loop between
them form the transmembrane pore; and the short, highly conserved
intracellular loop between domains III and IV forms the inactivation
gate (reviewed in Refs. 10 and 11). The large intracellular domains are
targets for channel modulation by protein phosphorylation and G protein
binding (reviewed in Ref. 12). In contrast to the well established
functional roles of the transmembrane and intracellular domains of the
channel, the functional roles of the extracellular loops of the sodium
channel
subunit have not been defined. Peptide neurotoxins from
scorpions and sea anemones modulate gating by binding to receptor sites
in the extracellular domains (13, 14), and the extracellular domain of
the
1 subunit is primarily responsible for its modulation of
subunit function (15-17). These results suggest that the extracellular
loops of
subunits might also be important determinants of sodium
channel gating. Cardiac sodium channel
subunits (type H1) (18, 19) differ substantially from brain type IIA in their voltage dependence and kinetics of activation and inactivation and in their response to
association with
1 subunits (11). In this study, we have analyzed
the functional properties and the modulation by the
1 subunit of
chimeras constructed between rat brain type IIA
(rIIA)1 and rat heart (rH1)
sodium channel
subunits to reveal functional activities of the
extracellular loops of the
subunit and to identify specific
extracellular segments that are important determinants of
voltage-dependent gating and interaction with the
1 subunit.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Construction of Chimeric rIIA Sodium Channels--
Five M13
constructs collectively spanning nearly the entire rIIA sequence were
used as templates for site-directed mutagenesis. The template mp18SSNC
(nucleotides 1898-2700) contains the SmaI/SphI rIIA fragment. The template mp19BstNC was created by first introducing a BstEII site in the mp19 vector and then subcloning the
SphI/BstEII rIIA fragment (nucleotides
2701-4636). The remaining three templates, mp18KXNC (nucleotides
23-540), mp19XaI (nucleotides 541-1897), and mp18RVNC (nucleotides
4279-5997) have been described (13).
Of the 16 extracellular loops, one loop is identical between the rIIA
and rH1 isoforms (IS3-S4), and 12 of the remaining loops were short
enough to use oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis to directly
introduce the rIIA-to-rH1 amino acid changes, using uracil-containing
templates and the dut
ung
selection
procedure (20). The three remaining large loop chimeras (IS5-SS1,
IIIS5-SS1, and IVSS2-S6) were created by using oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis to delete the sequence encoding each loop while
simultaneously introducing silent restriction sites flanking these
individual regions. Cardiac-specific primers containing the flanking
restriction sites were then used to amplify the sequence encoding each
corresponding loop from rH1 cDNA for cloning into the appropriate
region of rIIA, as described previously (13). Fragments containing
mutations were then excised from these mutagenesis templates and cloned into pCDM8SalK-NC or pCDM8Sal-NC. All mutations were confirmed in the
final constructs by DNA sequencing and extensive restriction mapping.
Sodium Channel Expression--
pCDM8 plasmids encoding WT and
chimeric sodium channel
subunits were linearized with
ClaI, and plasmids encoding
1 subunits were linearized
with HindIII. Transcription was performed with T7 RNA
polymerase (Ambion Inc., Austin, TX). Isolation, preparation, and
maintenance of Xenopus oocytes were carried out as described previously (21). Healthy oocytes selected manually were
pressure-injected with 50 nl of a solution containing either a 1:4 or
1:1 molar ratio of
to
1 subunit RNA. Electrophysiological
recordings were carried out 2-5 days after injection.
Electrophysiological Recording--
Two-electrode voltage-clamp
experiments were performed as described previously (22). The amplitude
of expressed sodium currents was typically 0.5-5 µA. The
voltage-clamp protocols are described in the figure legends.
Conductance-voltage (g-V) relationships were
derived from current-voltage (I-V) relationships
according to g = I/(V
Vr), where I is the peak current
amplitude measured at voltage V and the reversal potential
Vr is assumed to be +55 mV under our recording
conditions. Normalized g-V relationships and
inactivation curves were fit with a Boltzmann distribution, 1/(1 + exp((V
V1/2)/k)), where V1/2 is the voltage at which half-activation
or half-inactivation occurred and k is a slope factor. The
time courses of current decay and recovery from inactivation were
described with two exponentials, a(1
exp(
t/
1)) + (1
a)(1
exp(
t/
2)), where a is the
fraction of the fast component,
1 is the time constant
of the fast component, and
2 is the time constant of the
slow component. Pooled data are reported as means ± S.D.
Statistical comparisons were done using Student's t test, with p < 0.05 as the criterion for significance.
 |
RESULTS |
Effects of the Extracellular Loops of the Sodium Channel
Subunit on Gating
Chimeric Brain/Heart Sodium Channels--
Compared with rat brain
sodium channels, rat cardiac sodium channels containing the rH1
subunit (18, 19) activate and inactivate at more negative membrane
potentials, and the kinetics of inactivation and recovery from
inactivation are faster when expressed in Xenopus oocytes
(11, 23, 24). The electrophysiological properties of the two wild-type
sodium channels and each chimeric channel were analyzed in
two-microelectrode whole-cell voltage-clamp experiments in
Xenopus oocytes. Fig. 1 shows
typical sodium currents elicited from WT rIIA and rH1
subunits
expressed alone in Xenopus oocytes. The resolution of the
two-microelectrode voltage clamp of small oocytes (25) was adequate for
detailed analysis of the kinetics of inactivation, but the rate of
activation was not resolved with sufficient precision for accurate
analysis. As reported previously (23, 24), the rate of inactivation of
the rH1
subunit was faster than that of the rIIA
subunit
expressed alone in Xenopus oocytes (Fig. 1, A and
B). Coexpression of
1 subunits greatly accelerated
inactivation of rIIA
subunits (Fig. 1A), but had little
effect on the rH1
subunit (Fig. 1B). Modulation by the
1 subunits therefore results in faster activation and inactivation
of wild-type rIIA than rH1
subunits.

View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Effect of coexpression of the
1 subunit on inactivation of rIIA and rH1 sodium
currents in Xenopus oocytes. Sodium currents were
elicited by a test pulse to 20 mV, recorded, and normalized at the peak
of the current. A, rIIA subunit. Solid trace,
rIIA alone; dashed trace, rIIA plus the 1 subunit (1:4
RNA molar ratio). Calibration bars = 10 ms, 1 µA for
rIIA alone and 1.4 µA for rIIA plus the 1 subunit. B,
rH1 subunit. Solid trace, rH1 alone; dashed
trace, rH1 plus the 1 subunit (1:4 RNA molar ratio).
Calibration bars = 10 ms, 1 µA for rH1 alone and 0.6 µA for rH1 plus the 1 subunit.
|
|
To examine the functional role of the extracellular loops in the sodium
channel
subunit, we substituted each predicted extracellular loop
in the brain rIIA
subunit individually with the corresponding sequence of the heart sodium channel rH1
subunit (Table
I), except for the loop between S3 and S4
in domain I, which is identical between rIIA and rH1. No sodium current
was detected when oocytes were injected with mRNAs from two
chimeras, one having substitutions in loop IIS1-S2 and the other in
IIS3-S4. Although these two extracellular loop chimeras were not
analyzed in this study, a set of single amino acid chimeras containing
each of the amino acid differences in these two extracellular loops was
analyzed previously, and no changes in sodium channel gating or
response to
1 subunits were observed
(14).2 Each of the other 13 extracellular loop chimeras gave sodium currents sufficient for
detailed analysis (0.5-5 µA). For most chimeras, the expression
level was comparable to that of WT when 20 ng of each mRNA was
injected. For chimeras with lower expression levels than WT, up to 160 ng of
subunit mRNA was injected to obtain sodium currents of
similar amplitude to those observed for 20 ng of WT
subunit
mRNA.
Voltage Dependence of Activation and Inactivation--
The voltage
dependence of activation of WT rIIA and rH1
subunits and selected
subunit chimeras expressed alone in Xenopus oocytes is
illustrated as conductance-voltage curves in Fig.
2A, and the mean values for
Va, the voltage for half-maximal activation, are
presented in Fig. 2C. Va for rH1 is 18 mV
more negative than for rIIA (Fig. 2, A and C,
open symbols). Five chimeras (IIS5-SS1, IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2,
IIISS2-S6, and IVS3-S4) had a more negative voltage dependence of
activation than WT rIIA (Fig. 2, A and C). Only
chimera IVSS2-S6 was observed to have a slightly more positive voltage
dependence of activation than WT rIIA. Thus, these extracellular loops
are important determinants of the voltage dependence of activation and
contribute to the more negative voltage dependence observed for cardiac
rH1 channels. If their effects were additive, they would more than
account for the difference in activation gating between the two
channels.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Effects of substitution of extracellular
segments on the voltage dependence of activation and inactivation.
A, mean voltage dependence of activation of WT rIIA, rH1,
and chimeras that are significantly different from WT rIIA.
Open circles, WT rIIA; open squares,
rH1; closed circles, IIS5-SS1; inverted closed
triangles, IISS2-S6; closed squares, IIIS1-S2;
closed diamonds, IIISS2-S6; closed
triangles, IVS3-S4; closed hexagons, IVSS2-S6.
B, voltage dependence of inactivation of WT rIIA, rH1, and
chimeras that are significantly different from WT rIIA.
Symbols are the same as described for A.
Activation was measured from a holding potential of 90 mV, and
inactivation was measured from a holding potential of 100 mV with a
100-ms conditioning pulse to the indicated membrane potentials.
C, V1/2 values for activation
(Va). D, V1/2 values
for inactivation (Vh). The dotted
lines in C and D are the mean values
for rIIA alone. Open and closed symbols in
C and D correspond to those in A and
B. Significant differences from WT rIIA are indicated by
asterisks.
|
|
The voltage dependence of steady-state inactivation was studied with
100-ms conditioning prepulses. With this protocol, the voltage for
half-inactivation of rH1 was 17 mV more negative than that of rIIA
(Fig. 2B). Three chimeras (IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4)
inactivated at more negative potentials than WT rIIA, but at more
positive potentials than rH1 (Fig. 2B). These were the only
chimeras that had a shifted voltage dependence of inactivation (Fig.
2D). The three chimeras whose voltage dependence of
inactivation was negatively shifted (IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4)
also had a negatively shifted voltage dependence of activation (Fig. 2,
C and D), suggesting that the change in
inactivation results from coupling to the negatively shifted
activation. Thus, these three extracellular loops are important
determinants of the voltage dependence of inactivation as well as
activation. Together, the negative shifts in steady-state inactivation
observed for these three chimeras would be more than sufficient to
account for the difference in the voltage dependence of inactivation
between the rIIA and rH1
subunits.
Kinetics of Inactivation and Recovery from
Inactivation--
Expression of the WT rIIA
subunit alone in
Xenopus oocytes produced a slowly inactivating sodium
current (Fig. 3A, slow solid lines). The time courses of the decay of these sodium
currents are well fit by a sum of fast and slow exponentials, with the fraction of fast inactivation (Ffast) less than
0.1 for rIIA
subunits expressed alone and near 1.0 for rH1
expressed alone (Fig. 3E). The slowly inactivating component
of this biphasic time course has previously been shown to result from a
slow gating mode that is particularly prominent for type IIA
subunits expressed alone in Xenopus oocytes (7, 26, 27). It
is not thought to be related to the distinct slow inactivation process
of sodium channels, which requires longer depolarization and involves a different gating mechanism than fast inactivation (28-32). Most chimeras displayed a similar time course of inactivation to that of WT
at a test potential of +10 mV. However, five chimeras (IS5-SS1, ISS2-S6, IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4) inactivated faster than WT
(Fig. 3, A-D). As for WT, analysis of these sodium currents revealed that they could be fit by two exponential functions with fixed
time constants, but with an increased fraction of channels inactivating
with the faster time constant (Fig. 3E). These results indicate that the differences of these chimeric channels from WT are
caused by a shift of the chimeric channels from the slow to the fast
gating mode. Thus, these five extracellular segments are important
determinants of the channel gating mode.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Effects of substitution of extracellular
segments on the kinetics of inactivation. A-D, average
normalized sodium currents recorded at +10 mV in the absence
(slow traces) or presence (fast traces) of 1
subunits. Solid lines, rIIA; dotted
lines, chimeras IS5-SS1 (A), ISS2-S6
(B), IISS2-S6 (C), and IIIS1-S2 (D).
E, mean fractions of the fast component of inactivation in
the absence of 1 subunits. F, mean fractions of the fast
component of inactivation in the presence of 1 subunits. Data are
presented for a 1:4 molar ratio of to 1 mRNA except as
noted. Dashed lines indicate mean values derived from either
rIIA alone in E or rIIA + the 1 subunit (1:4 molar ratio)
in F. Significant differences from rIIA are denoted by
asterisks.
|
|
The rate of recovery from inactivation at negative holding potentials
was studied by repolarization to
100 mV following a conditioning
pulse to
10 mV for 300 ms. As for inactivation, the time course of
recovery from inactivation for WT rIIA channels expressed without
1
subunits can be described by a sum of two exponentials, with
approximately half of the channels recovering rapidly from inactivation
(Fig. 4A). Using this
protocol, the fraction of fast recovery from inactivation is ~0.6 for
rIIA and 0.9 for rH1 (Fig. 4E). For most chimeric channels,
the fraction of fast recovery from inactivation was similar to that of
WT rIIA
subunits (Fig. 4E). However, four chimeras that
inactivated rapidly (IS5-SS1, ISS2-S6, IISS2-S6, and IIIS1-S2) also had
faster kinetics of recovery from inactivation compared with WT rIIA
channels (Fig. 4, A-D, closed circles for
chimeras versus open circles for rIIA). This
accelerated recovery from inactivation was caused by a shift of
channels from the slow gating mode to the fast gating mode, as
illustrated in the measurements of Ffast in Fig.
4E.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Effects of substitution of extracellular
segments on recovery from inactivation. A-D, recovery
from inactivation was measured at 100 mV after a conditioning pulse
for 300 ms to 10 mV in either the absence (circles) or
presence (inverted triangles) of 1 subunits. Data and
two-exponential fits (solid lines) are illustrated for
representative cells. Open symbols, rIIA; closed
symbols, IS5-SS1 (A), ISS2-S6 (B), IISS2-S6
(C), and IIIS1-S2 (D). E, mean values
for the fraction of fast recovery from inactivation for the indicated
chimeras expressed alone. F, mean values for the fraction of
fast recovery from inactivation for the indicated chimeras expressed
with 1 subunits. Data are presented for a 1:4 molar ratio of to
1 mRNA except as noted. Dotted lines indicate mean
values derived from either rIIA alone or rIIA + the 1 subunit (1:4
molar ratio). Significant differences are denoted by
asterisks.
|
|
The effects of these chimeric substitutions on the kinetics of
inactivation and recovery from inactivation indicate that four extracellular loops in domains I and III are important determinants of
the sodium channel gating mode and that segment IVS3-S4 also has a
minor effect. These are the first regions of the sodium channel
structure found to have specific effects on the gating mode. As for the
effects on voltage dependence, these effects of chimeric substitutions
on the gating mode would be sufficient to fully account for the
difference between rIIA and rH1 if they were additive.
Modulation of Sodium Channel Gating by Coexpression of
1
Subunits
Differential Modulation of Cardiac and Brain Sodium Channels by
1 Subunits--
When either brain or skeletal muscle sodium channel
subunits are expressed alone in Xenopus oocytes, the
resulting sodium currents are small, and they activate and inactivate
abnormally slowly (6, 26, 27, 33). Coexpression of the
1 subunit increases the current amplitude, negatively shifts the voltage dependence of activation and inactivation, and accelerates the rate of
inactivation and recovery from inactivation (8, 34-39), as illustrated
for type IIA sodium channels in Figs. 1A, 3A, and 4A. The acceleration of inactivation and recovery from
inactivation are thought to result from a shift of the rIIA
subunit
from a slow gating mode to a fast gating mode upon coexpression of
1
subunits (35, 37, 38, 40).
1 subunit mRNA is expressed in
cardiac myocytes, as assessed by high resolution in situ
hybridization (22). Coexpression of the rat
1 subunit with the rH1
subunit significantly increases the current amplitude in
Xenopus oocytes, but the voltage dependence and kinetics of
gating are not dramatically altered (22). Similar experiments with
human cardiac
and
1 subunits revealed significant effects of
coexpression of
1 subunits on the voltage dependence of
inactivation, but these effects were much smaller than those observed
for brain or skeletal muscle sodium channels (41, 42). These
differences in response to coexpression of
1 subunits suggested that
analysis of brain/cardiac sodium channel chimeras may reveal
extracellular loops required for
1 subunit binding or modulation of
subunit function.
Kinetics of Inactivation and Recovery from
Inactivation--
Effects of
1 subunits on the sodium channel
gating mode are most easily assessed from measurement of the kinetics
of inactivation and recovery from inactivation and analysis by
exponential curve fitting. Coexpression of the
1 subunit
substantially accelerated the kinetics of inactivation of rIIA (Fig.
3A, fast solid lines). The increased rate of
inactivation was fit by an increase in Ffast from <0.1 to ~0.9 for an
/
1 subunit RNA ratio of 1:4 (Fig. 3, E and F). Coexpression of
1 subunits at that
level substantially accelerated the rate of inactivation of all
chimeras (Fig. 3, A-D, dotted lines). With an
/
1 subunit RNA molar ratio of 1:4, most chimeric channels
displayed a fraction of fast inactivation near 0.9, comparable to WT
rIIA in the presence of
1 subunits (Fig. 3F). In
contrast, chimera IVSS2-S6 showed a substantially decreased fraction of
fast inactivating channels compared with WT in the presence of
1
subunits (Fig. 3F). Since its voltage dependence of
inactivation was not significantly different from WT rIIA
subunits
in the absence of
1 subunits, this observation suggests that
IVSS2-S6 is an important extracellular structure determining the
functional effect of
1 subunits on gating mode.
Coexpression of the
1 subunit also substantially increased the
fraction of rIIA channels recovering rapidly from inactivation (Fig. 4,
A-D, open symbols). The fraction of fast
recovery from inactivation increased from ~0.6 to 0.9 at an
/
1
subunit RNA ratio of 1:4 (Fig. 4, E and F). For
all the chimeras tested, the fraction of channels with fast recovery
from inactivation in the presence of the
1 subunit was ~0.9,
similar to WT, except for chimera IVSS2-S6 (Fig. 4, A-D,
open symbols; and Fig. 4F). Chimera IVSS2-S6 had
a similar recovery from inactivation compared with WT in the absence of
the
1 subunit (Fig. 4E), whereas in the presence of the
1 subunit, it showed slower recovery from inactivation due to a
reduced fraction of channels recovering in the fast gating mode (Fig.
4F). Considered together with the reduced
1 subunit effect on the inactivation kinetics of chimera IVSS2-S6, these results
demonstrate a decreased efficiency of
1 subunit modulation of
inactivation and recovery from inactivation for chimera IVSS2-S6 due to
decreased modulation of the sodium channel gating mode.
Reduced Effects of Coexpression of
1 Subunits on Chimera
IVSS2-S6--
To further investigate the ability of
1 subunits to
modulate chimera IVSS2-S6, we carried out experiments with a 1:1 molar ratio of
to
1 subunit mRNA to emphasize differences in
1
subunit modulation. In the absence of the
1 subunit, chimera
IVSS2-S6 and WT rIIA sodium channels inactivated at a similar rate
(Fig. 5A, traces 1 and 4). In contrast, after co-injection with an
/
1 subunit molar ratio of 1:1, chimera IVSS2-S6 inactivated at a substantially slower rate than WT rIIA (Fig. 5A,
traces 2 and 5), and a smaller, but still
significant difference in the rate of inactivation was observed when a
molar ratio of 1:4 was used (traces 3 and 6).

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Effect of substitution of extracellular
segment IVSS2-S6 on modulation of inactivation and recovery from
inactivation by the 1 subunit.
A, average normalized sodium currents recorded at +10 mV in
either the absence or presence of 1 subunits (n = 6 for each current trace). Solid lines, rIIA;
dotted lines, chimera IVSS2-S6. Traces 1 and
4, subunits alone; traces 2 and 5,
subunits plus 1 subunits at an / 1 subunit molar ratio of
1:1; traces 3 and 6, / 1 subunit molar ratio
of 1:4. B, recovery from inactivation at 100 mV in either
the absence or presence of 1 subunits. Solid lines are
two-exponential fits from representative cells. Open
symbols, rIIA; closed symbols, IVSS2-S6;
circles, subunits alone; squares, / 1
subunit molar ratio of 1:1; inverted triangles, / 1
subunit molar ratio of 1:4.
|
|
In the absence of the
1 subunit, chimera IVSS2-S6 had a time course
of recovery similar to that of WT (Fig. 5B,
circles). However, the
1 subunit was less effective at
accelerating the recovery from inactivation for chimera IVSS2-S6 than
for WT channels when coexpressed either at a 1:1 (Fig. 5B,
squares) or at a 1:4 (inverted triangles) molar
ratio of
to
1 subunit mRNA. Thus, as for measurement of
inactivation, the difference between WT and chimera IVSS2-S6 is more
pronounced at a lower level of coexpression of
1 subunit mRNA.
These results imply a reduced affinity of the chimera for the expressed
1 subunit since the deficit in
1 subunit modulation can be at
least partially compensated by increased expression of the
1 subunit.
Chimera IVSS2-S6 had a more positive voltage dependence of activation
in either the presence or absence of
1 subunits (Fig. 2 and data not
shown), which could slow inactivation due to the coupling of
inactivation to activation. The voltage dependence of inactivation was
also similar to that of WT rIIA in either the presence or absence of
1 subunits (Fig. 2 and data not shown). Evidently, coexpression of
1 subunits with chimera IVSS2-S6 was able to cause a similar shift
in the voltage dependence of inactivation as for WT. These results show
that substitution of the extracellular loop in chimera IVSS2-S6 causes
decreased effectiveness of
1 subunit modulation of the kinetics of
inactivation and recovery from inactivation specifically, without major
effects on the voltage dependence or kinetics of gating in the absence
of the
1 subunits. This might occur by weakening the association of
and
1 subunits and/or by decreasing the functional modulation of
the gating mode of the
subunit by the bound
1 subunit.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Our experiments provide the first evidence for functional roles of
the extracellular loops of the sodium channel in its normal gating. We
consider below each of the observed effects on channel gating in light
of other data on the gating of brain and cardiac sodium channels and
its modulation by coexpression of
1 subunits. A molecular map of the
functional effects of chimeric substitutions in extracellular loops of
the sodium channel
subunit is presented in Fig.
6 for reference.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Summary of the functional effects of
substitution of the extracellular loops of the sodium channel.
Upper, the functional effects of chimeric mutations are
illustrated for each extracellular loop. Under each domain (I-IV), the
first column reflects the S1-S2 loop, the second
column the S3-S4 loop, the third column the S5-SS1
loop, and the fourth column the SS2-S6 loop.
Va, voltage for half-maximal activation;
Vh, voltage for half-maximal inactivation;
Ff, fraction of channels in the fast gating mode
determined for recovery from inactivation; -ScTx, effects
on scorpion -toxin binding; -ScTx, effects on scorpion
-toxin binding; 1, effects on modulation by the 1
subunit. + denotes an effect; denotes no effect. Lower,
the structure of the sodium channel subunit correlated with the
functional effects of substitution of each extracellular loop.
|
|
Conversion of rIIA Extracellular Loops into rH1 Sequences Causes
Changes in the Voltage Dependence of Gating Similar to the Cardiac
Isoform--
Cardiac sodium channels activate and inactivate at more
negative membrane potentials than brain sodium channels when expressed in Xenopus oocytes (11, 23, 24). Our results show that
molecular differences in the extracellular loops of the
subunits
make an important contribution to this difference in activation gating. The sum of the voltage shifts caused by substitution of the IIS5-SS1, IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, IIISS2-S6, and IVS3-S4 segments is
22.7 mV, more
than enough to account for the entire shift in the voltage dependence
of activation between these two channels if the changes are truly
additive when combined in a single channel construct. These results
provide the first evidence that extracellular loops are important
determinants of the gating properties of sodium channel isoforms, but
previous work on L-type calcium channels has shown that the kinetics
and voltage dependence of gating of the cardiac and skeletal muscle
calcium channel isoforms are controlled by the IS3 segment and IS3-S4
loop (43). Evidently, isoform-specific differences in extracellular
loop sequences can have important effects on activation gating, even
though the S4 voltage sensors whose movements drive the activation
process are located within the membrane. Requirements for movements of
these extracellular loops during the gating process are likely to be
responsible for the observed effects on the voltage dependence of activation.
Cardiac sodium channels also inactivate at more negative membrane
potentials than brain sodium channels when expressed in Xenopus oocytes (11, 23, 24). The voltage dependence of inactivation is derived primarily from its coupling to the highly voltage-dependent activation process (44). Therefore, it
would be expected that some of the chimeric substitutions that alter the voltage dependence of activation gating would also alter the voltage dependence of steady-state inactivation. We found that chimeric
substitutions in segments IISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4 all shifted
the voltage dependence of steady-state inactivation negatively, toward
the Vh value for cardiac sodium channels. The sum of
the negative shifts (
21.6 mV) observed would more than account for
the difference in Vh observed between the WT rIIA
and rH1
subunits expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Thus, it
is likely that these extracellular segments are involved in the
conformational changes that couple activation to inactivation in sodium channels.
Chimeric Substitutions of Four rIIA Extracellular Loops with rH1
Sequences Cause Changes in Modal Gating Similar to the Cardiac
Isoform--
Sodium currents due to expression of the rH1
subunit
alone in Xenopus oocytes have rates of fast inactivation and
recovery from inactivation that are comparable to those of native
cardiac sodium channels (23, 24), consistent with channel function in
the fast gating mode. Chimeric substitutions of rH1 sequences in the
IS5-SS1, ISS2-S6, IISS2-S6, or IIIS1-S2 loop of rIIA caused a greater
fraction of sodium channels to inactivate and recover from inactivation
in the fast gating mode compared with WT rIIA channel in the absence of
1 subunits. Thus, these chimeric sodium channels behaved more like
the cardiac isoform in terms of the gating mode. As the inactivation
process itself takes place on the intracellular side of the sodium
channel (44) and involves closure of an inactivation gate formed by the
intracellular loop between domains III and IV (45-47), it is unlikely
that these extracellular sequences contribute directly to the
inactivation process. Instead, they are likely to be involved in the
conformational changes that determine the inactivation gating mode and
that control coupling of voltage-dependent activation to
inactivation. In calcium channels, amino acid residues in the IS6
transmembrane segments and the ISS2-S6 loop also affect the kinetics of
inactivation of channel chimeras (48), suggesting a role for these
corresponding segments of calcium channel
1 subunits in controlling
the rate of voltage-dependent inactivation.
The IVSS2-S6 Extracellular Loop Is Important for Modulation of the
Gating Mode by
1 Subunits--
1 subunits are single
membrane-spanning proteins with a small intracellular domain and a
larger extracellular domain that is composed primarily of an
immunoglobulin-like motif resembling those of cell adhesion molecules
(8, 9, 49). Multiple lines of evidence indicate that the
immunoglobulin-like motif in the extracellular domain of the
1
subunit is primarily responsible for the functional modulation of
sodium channels (17). First, deletion of the intracellular domain of
1 subunits does not alter their modulation of skeletal muscle (15,
16) or brain (17) sodium channel function. Second, deletion of all or
part of the extracellular domain prevents the functional modulation of
skeletal muscle or brain sodium channels by
1 subunits (15-17).
Third, clustered mutations in the core of the immunoglobulin fold and in the A-A'
strand on one edge of the immunoglobulin fold of the
1 subunit prevent or reduce the functional modulation of brain
sodium channels (17). Fourth, the extracellular domain of the
1
subunit is sufficient for sodium channel modulation when
membrane-anchored by an unrelated transmembrane segment or a lipid
anchor (50). Thus, it is likely that
1 subunits interact with
subunits and modulate their function through a site formed by one or
more of the extracellular loops of the
subunit.
Of the 13 extracellular chimeras studied here, only substitution of the
IVSS2-S6 segment had a major effect on the modulation of sodium channel
modal gating properties by the
1 subunit. This chimera had
inactivation properties comparable to those of WT in the absence of
1 subunits, but it had significantly slower inactivation than WT
when coexpressed with
1 subunits and significantly slower recovery
from inactivation. Because these effects on rIIA
subunits have
previously been shown to result from a shift from a slow to fast gating
mode upon expression of
1 subunits in Xenopus oocytes
(35), our results indicate that this chimera is less responsive to the
effect of the
1 subunit to shift channels to the fast gating mode.
Therefore, our results implicate the IVSS2-S6 segment in interaction
with
1 subunits and in modulation of the gating mode by
1
subunits. Since the reduced
1 subunit effect on chimera IVSS2-S6 can
be partially restored by expression of a higher level of
1 subunits,
it is likely that the affinity of the chimeric
subunit for the
1
subunit is reduced. Therefore, we propose that the IVSS2-S6 segment is
one point of interaction between the immunoglobulin-like domain of the
1 subunit and the rIIA
subunit. A similar conclusion was reached
by analysis of a different set of channel chimeras between cardiac and
skeletal muscle sodium channels (Ref. 16 and see below).
Comparison with Studies of Chimeric Cardiac and Skeletal Muscle
Sodium Channels--
There are comparable functional differences
between cardiac and skeletal muscle sodium channels to those described
here for cardiac and brain sodium channels. Previous work on chimeras
with substitutions of the large intracellular loops connecting the four
homologous domains of the sodium channel
subunit found that none of
the three cytoplasmic interdomain sequences was responsible for the
functional differences between cardiac and skeletal muscle sodium
channels (51). The functional and pharmacological properties of
chimeras based on exchanges of entire homologous domains between skeletal muscle and cardiac sodium channels have also been studied. The
exchange of domain I produced sodium channels with intermediate inactivation kinetics between skeletal muscle and cardiac channels (52), and exchanges of domains III and IV also had effects on inactivation (51). These results are consistent with our findings that
substitutions of the IS5-SS1, ISS2-S6, IIIS1-S2, and IVS3-S4 extracellular loops all affect inactivation properties.
The site of interaction of
1 subunits with
subunits of sodium
channels has also been analyzed in studies with chimeras of human heart
and skeletal muscle sodium channels (16). Substitution of the S5-S6
loops in domains I and IV of the skeletal muscle sodium channel with
the corresponding segments of the cardiac channel abolished response to
coexpression of the
1 subunit, and the reciprocal transfer yielded a
partial response of the cardiac sodium channel to the
1 subunit.
Further dissection of the S5-S6 loop in domain IV suggested that the
IVSS2-S6 extracellular loop was important for functional interaction
with
1 subunits. These results are consistent with the conclusion
that extracellular interactions are most important for modulation of
sodium channel gating by
1 subunits and are in agreement with our
conclusion from analysis of extracellular chimeras of brain and cardiac
sodium channels that the IVSS2-S6 loop is critical for this functional interaction.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health
Research Grants RO1 NS25704 and PO1 HL44946 (to W. A. C.), by
postdoctoral National Research Service awards (to Y. Q., S.-F. C.,
and K. A. M.), and by a predoctoral National Research Service award
(to J. C. R.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Pharmacology,
University of Washington, P. O. Box 357280, Seattle, WA 98195-7280. Tel.: 206-543-1925; Fax: 206-543-3882; E-mail:
wcatt@u.washington.edu.
2
Y. Qu, J. C. Rogers, S.-F. Chen, K. A. McCormick, T. Scheuer, and W. A. Catterall, unpublished results.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
rIIA, rat IIA;
rH1, rat H1;
WT, wild-type.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Catterall, W. A.
(1984)
Science
223,
653-661[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Catterall, W. A.
(1992)
Physiol. Rev.
72,
S15-S48
|
| 3.
|
Goldin, A. L.,
Snutch, T.,
Lubbert, H.,
Dowsett, A.,
Marshall, J.,
Auld, V.,
Downey, W.,
Fritz, L. C.,
Lester, H. A.,
Dunn, R.,
Catterall, W. A.,
and Davidson, N.
(1986)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
83,
7503-7507[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Noda, M.,
Ikeda, T.,
Suzuki, T.,
Takeshima, H.,
Takahashi, T.,
Kuno, M.,
and Numa, S.
(1986)
Nature
322,
826-828[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Noda, M.,
Ikeda, T.,
Kayano, T.,
Suzuki, H.,
Takeshima, H.,
Kurasaki, M.,
Takahashi, H.,
and Numa, S.
(1986)
Nature
320,
188-192[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Auld, V. J.,
Goldin, A. L.,
Krafte, D. S.,
Marshall, J.,
Dunn, J. M.,
Catterall, W. A.,
Lester, H. A.,
Davidson, N.,
and Dunn, R. J.
(1988)
Neuron
1,
449-461[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Auld, V. J.,
Goldin, A. L.,
Krafte, D. S.,
Catterall, W. A.,
Lester, H. A.,
Davidson, N.,
and Dunn, R. J.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
323-327[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Isom, L. L.,
De Jongh, K. S.,
Patton, D. E.,
Reber, B. F. X.,
Offord, J.,
Charbonneau, H.,
Walsh, K.,
Goldin, A. L.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1992)
Science
256,
839-842[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Isom, L. L.,
Ragsdale, D. S.,
De Jongh, K. S.,
Westenbroek, R. E.,
Reber, B. F. X.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1995)
Cell
83,
433-442[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Catterall, W. A.
(1995)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65,
493-531[CrossRef]
|
| 11.
|
Fozzard, H. A.,
and Hanck, D. A.
(1996)
Physiol. Rev.
76,
887-926[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Catterall, W. A.
(1997)
Adv. Second Messenger Phosphoprotein Res.
31,
159-181[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Rogers, J. C.,
Qu, Y.,
Tanada, T. N.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
15950-15962[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Cestèle, S.,
Qu, Y.,
Rogers, J. C.,
Rochat, H.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1998)
Neuron
21,
919-931[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Chen, C. F.,
and Cannon, S. C.
(1995)
Pfluegers Arch. Eur. J. Physiol.
431,
186-195[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Makita, N.,
Bennett, P. B., Jr.,
and George, A. L., Jr.
(1996)
J. Neurosci.
16,
7117-7127[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
McCormick, K. A.,
Isom, L. L.,
Ragsdale, D.,
Smith, D.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
3954-3962[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Rogart, R. B.,
Cribbs, L. L.,
Muglia, L. K.,
Kephart, D. D.,
and Kaiser, M. W.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
8170-8174[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Kallen, R. G.,
Sheng, Z. H.,
Yang, J.,
Chen, L.-Q.,
Rogart, R. B.,
and Barchi, R. L.
(1990)
Neuron.
4,
233-242[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Kunkel, T. A.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
488-492[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
McPhee, J. C.,
Ragsdale, D. S.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
12025-12034[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Qu, Y.,
Isom, L. L.,
Westenbroek, R. E.,
Rogers, J. C.,
Tanada, T. N.,
McCormick, K. A.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
25696-25701[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Cribbs, L. L.,
Satin, J.,
Fozzard, H. A.,
and Rogart, R. B.
(1990)
FEBS Lett.
275,
195-200[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
White, M. M.,
Chen, L.-Q.,
Kleinfield, R.,
Kallen, R. G.,
and Barchi, R. L.
(1991)
Mol. Pharmacol.
39,
604-608[Abstract]
|
| 25.
|
Krafte, D. S.,
and Lester, H. A.
(1989)
J. Neurosci. Methods
26,
211-215[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Moorman, J. R.,
Kirsch, G. E.,
VanDongen, A. M.,
Joho, R. H.,
and Brown, A. M.
(1990)
Neuron
4,
243-252[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Zhou, J.,
Potts, J. F.,
Trimmer, J. S.,
Agnew, W. S.,
and Sigworth, F. J.
(1991)
Neuron
7,
755-785[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Adelman, W. J.,
and Palti, Y.
(1968)
J. Gen. Physiol.
54,
589-606[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Narahashi, T.
(1964)
J. Cell. Comp. Physiol.
64,
73-96[CrossRef]
|
| 30.
|
Ogata, N.,
and Tatebayashi, H.
(1992)
J. Membr. Biol.
129,
71-80[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Rudy, B.
(1978)
J. Physiol. (Lond.)
283,
1-21[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Featherstone, D. E.,
Richmond, J. E.,
and Ruben, P. C.
(1996)
Biophys. J.
71,
3098-3109[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Ji, S.,
Sun, W.,
George, A. L., Jr.,
Horn, R.,
and Barchi, R. L.
(1994)
J. Gen. Physiol.
104,
625-643[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Makita, N.,
Bennett, P. B., Jr.,
and George, A. L., Jr.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
7571-7578[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Patton, D. E.,
Isom, L. L.,
Catterall, W. A.,
and Goldin, A. L.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
17649-17655[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Cannon, S. C.,
McClatchey, A. I.,
and Gusella, J. F.
(1993)
Pfluegers Arch. Eur. J. Physiol.
423,
155-157[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Bennett, P. B., Jr.,
Makita, N.,
and George, A. L., Jr.
(1993)
FEBS Lett.
326,
21-24[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Wallner, M.,
Weigl, L.,
Meera, P.,
and Lotan, I.
(1993)
FEBS Lett.
336,
535-539[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Yang, J. S.,
Bennett, P. B.,
Makita, N.,
George, A. L.,
and Barchi, R. L.
(1993)
Neuron
11,
915-922[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Chang, S. Y.,
Satin, J.,
and Fozzard, H. A.
(1996)
Biophys. J.
70,
2581-2592[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Makielski, J. C.,
Limberis, J. T.,
Chang, S. Y.,
Fan, Z.,
and Kyle, J. N.
(1996)
Mol. Pharmacol.
49,
30-39[Abstract]
|
| 42.
|
Nuss, H. B.,
Chiamvimonvat, N.,
Pérez-Garcia, M. T.,
Tomaselli, G. F.,
and Marbán, E.
(1995)
J. Gen. Physiol.
106,
1171-1191[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Nakai, J.,
Adams, B. A.,
Imoto, K.,
and Beam, K. G.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
1014-1018[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Armstrong, C. M.
(1981)
Physiol. Rev.
61,
644-682[Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Vassilev, P. M.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1988)
Science
241,
1658-1661[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
West, J. W.,
Patton, D. E.,
Scheuer, T.,
Wang, Y.,
Goldin, A. L.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
10910-10914[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 47.
|
Kellenberger, S.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
30971-30979[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 48.
|
Zhang, J.-F.,
Ellinor, P. T.,
Aldrich, R. W.,
and Tsien, R. W.
(1994)
Nature
372,
97-100[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Isom, L. L.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1996)
Nature
383,
307-308[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 50.
|
McCormick, K. A.,
Srinivasan, J.,
White, K.,
Scheuer, T.,
and Catterall, W. A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
32638-32646[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
Makita, N.,
Bennett, P. B., Jr.,
and George, A. L., Jr.
(1996)
Circ. Res.
78,
244-252[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 52.
|
Chen, L.-Q.,
Chahine, M.,
Kallen, R. G.,
Barchi, R. L.,
and Horn, R.
(1992)
FEBS Lett.
309,
253-257[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike ![]()