![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 17, 14475-14482, April 26, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Department of Pharmacology, Center for Molecular
Neuroscience Vanderbilt University Medical Center,
Nashville, Tennessee 37232-6600
Received for publication, November 9, 2001, and in revised form, January 29, 2002
We express mammalian serotonin transporters
(SERTs) in Xenopus oocytes by cRNA injection and measure
5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) transport and 5-HT-induced current at
varying expression levels. Transport and current both increase
sigmoidally with the amount of cRNA injected, but current requires
~5-fold more cRNA to elicit a half-maximal response. Western blots of
SERT protein demonstrate that current, but not transport, correlates
linearly with the amount of SERT on the plasma membrane. In oocytes
co-injected with wild-type SERT and an inactive SERT mutant, transport
is similar to SERT alone, but current is attenuated. The
charge/transport ratio reports the differential sensitivity of
transport and current to increasing SERT cRNA injection and mutant
co-expression. Manipulations that alter the charge/transport ratio also
perturb substrate and inhibitor recognition. 5-HT, d-amphetamine,
cocaine, and paroxetine inhibit transport more potently at lower
expression levels; however, 5-HT potency for induction of current is
similar at high and low expression. Moreover, the apparent potency of
cRNA for transport depends on 5-HT concentration. We postulate that
SERT interacts allosterically with an endogenous factor of limited
abundance to alter substrate and inhibitor potency and the balance of
5-HT transport and channel-like activity.
Serotonin transporters accumulate serotonin into cells
following 5-HT1 release,
thereby modulating serotonergic signaling and neurotransmission (1).
5-HT is implicated in a variety of behaviors, including mood, sleep,
pain, appetite, aggression, and sexual behavior, and
serotonin-selective reuptake inhibitors are useful for the treatment of
human diseases (depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bulimia
and eating disorders, alcoholism, anxiety and panic disorders,
and premenstrual dysphoric disorder) (2, 3). SERT is a receptor for
psychostimulant drugs of abuse such as 3,4-methylenedeoxymethamphetamine, amphetamine, and cocaine (4-6).
SERT (SLC6A4) is a member of the GAT/NET transporter family that
encodes carriers for neurotransmitters, solutes, and amino acids that
are similar in function (Na+,Cl Classically, GAT/NET transporters function with fixed ion-substrate
stoichiometry (19, 20). However, 5-HT transport deviates from classical
expectations in stably transfected HEK-293 cells (21). Biophysical
studies show that hundreds of elementary charges can move through SERT,
NET, and DAT for each neurotransmitter molecule (22-24).
Transporter-mediated ion channel activity, evidenced by single channel
currents or current fluctuations, is reported for GAT1, NET, and SERT
(25-27). The ion dependence of 5-HT transport predicts electroneutral
function (28, 29), yet SERT generates three phenomenologically distinct
currents: constitutive current (also termed leak or slippage),
5-HT-induced steady-state currents, and a rapidly inactivating
transient current (22, 23).
Large transporter-associated currents and channel-like activity are not
universally observed for GAT/NET transporters. Fixed ion-substrate
coupling is reported for rGAT1 (30, 31) and rat brain-specific proline
transporter (32) under voltage clamp, suggesting that variable
stoichiometry and excess current may depend on as yet unidentified
factors. In vivo, serotonergic synapses of Hirudo
manifest rapid, Na+-dependent presynaptic
currents ascribed to SERT (33). In the face of a conserved sequence in
the GAT/NET family, which would suggest similar structure and function,
these apparent discrepancies in the literature regarding ion fluxes in
excess of transmitter flux are puzzling. GAT/NET transporters are known
to associate with proteins that alter their function (34-36), and
heterologous expression systems could yield disparate results if they
fail to reconstitute interactions between transporters and other
regulatory proteins or cellular factors. Changes in 5-HT transport,
5-HT-induced current, and plasma membrane transporter density are
associated with protein kinase C activation, SERT phosphorylation, and
ligand occupancy (37, 38). Transporter activity may also be sensitive to allosteric interactions between subunits of an oligomeric SERT complex (15, 39, 40).
Here we measure 5-HT transport ( Xenopus laevis Oocyte Isolation and cRNA Injection--
The
oocytes were isolated as described previously (23) and incubated in
frog Ringer's solution (96 mM NaCl, 2 mM KCl,
4 mM MgCl2, 0.6 mM
CaCl2, 5 mM HEPES, pH 7.6, at 23 °C,
195-205 mOsm). cDNA constructs encoding either the human serotonin
transporter (hSERT) in pOTV (gift of M. Sonders, Vollum Institute,
Portland, OR), rSERT in pBS II SK [3H]5-HT Transport Assays--
The assays were
initiated by addition of [3H]5-HT (12-30 nM)
in a final volume of 200 or 500 µl and proceeded for the indicated time at 24 °C. For 5-HT saturation studies, [3H]5-HT
(30 nM) was supplemented with nonradiolabeled 5-HT to the indicated concentration. 5-HT, d-amphetamine, and cocaine were added 3 min prior and paroxetine was added 15 min prior to
[3H]5-HT in drug competition studies. Nonspecific
[3H]5-HT accumulation was defined in noninjected oocytes
and was not significantly different from that measured in the presence of 10 µM citalopram or 10 µM cocaine. The
reactions were terminated by three washes in 2 ml of ice-cold frog
Ringer's solution. The oocytes were solubilized by shaking for 1 h with 1% SDS. Incorporated [3H] radioactivity was
counted by liquid scintillation spectrometry (3.5 ml of Ecoscint H,
National Diagnostics) in polypropylene vials and converted to
[3H]DPM (1600 TS, Beckman Instruments).
Two-electrode Voltage Clamp--
The oocytes were impaled with
glass microelectrodes containing 3 M KCl (1-3 M Charge/Transport Ratio ( Western Blotting--
Equal numbers of oocytes from each cRNA
injection (typically 20-30) were washed with ice-cold frog Ringer's
solution and incubated with 1.0 mg/ml EZ-Link Sulfo-NHS-biotin (Pierce)
in with ice-cold frog Ringer's solution with gentle agitation for 60 min. The oocytes were incubated for 60 min in ice-cold frog Ringer's
solution containing 100 mM glycine, washed twice, and
stored at Statistics and Curve Fitting--
Reported values represent
means ± S.E. unless otherwise indicated. Statistical significance
was determined using Student's nonpaired t test (Microcal
Origin, Northampton, MA). Significant differences are indicated by one
asterisk for p < 0.05 and two asterisks for
p < 0.01. For curve fits, parameter values represent the means ± 95% confidence interval using the
Levenberg-Marquardt nonlinear least squares algorithm (Origin).
Parameter values are fixed where confidence intervals are not given.
Xenopus oocytes were injected with increasing amounts
of SERT cRNA and assayed after a 2-day incubation (24 °C). Fig.
1A shows a representative
Western blot of biotinylated oocyte extracts probed with the
hSERT-specific monoclonal antibody ST 51-2. hSERT immunoreactivity was
absent in noninjected oocytes (lane 1 and 2)
and depends on the amount of cRNA injected (lanes
3-8), indicating that ST 51-2 detects authentic hSERT protein.
Several forms of hSERT were distinguished: a small band (~60 kDa)
that is present only in the intracellular fraction, a broad band
(70-100 kDa) that is typical of mature hSERT (43), and a larger band
(~220 kDa) in both surface and intracellular fractions that may
represent an SDS-resistant SERT protein complex. Despite the fact that
surface (biotin +) lanes represent the entire biotinylated fraction and intracellular (biotin To correlate hSERT surface expression with hSERT function, we measured
5-HT transport (
Serotonin Transporter Function and Pharmacology Are Sensitive to
Expression Level
EVIDENCE FOR AN ENDOGENOUS REGULATORY FACTOR*
and
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
dependence),
structure (12 putative transmembrane-spanning segments), and sequence
(1, 7). The three-dimensional structure and relative positions of
transmembrane-spanning segments is unknown for any member of the
GAT/NET family. The deduced amino acid sequences of mammalian SERT
cDNA clones (5, 7, 8) predict a polypeptide of ~68 kDa. Protein
purification and radiation inactivation studies estimate a similar size
for SERT (9, 10). SERT forms oligomeric complexes supported by FRET
interactions (11), chemical cross-linking (12), and functional
reconstitution following purification of a large protein complex (13,
14). Epitope-tagged rSERT proteins can be co-immunoprecipitated and
co-expression of
(2-aminoethyl)methanethiosulfonate-sensitive or -insensitive
mutants alters (2-aminoethyl)methanethiosulfonate inhibition,
indicating that intersubunit interactions in the oligomeric complex modulate SERT function (15). Additional evidence for oligomeric
complexes in GAT/NET transporters is suggested by expression of
concatenated mouse SERT cDNA (16) and radiation inactivation of
human dopamine transporter (17, 18).
5-HT) and 5-HT-induced
current (I(5-HT)) in Xenopus oocytes
injected with cRNA encoding wild-type and mutant mammalian SERTs. We
show that increasing the quantity of cRNA injected or co-injection with
an inactive SERT mutant alters the balance of
5-HT to
I(5-HT), which is reported by a change in the
charge/transport ratio (
). Expression of biotinylated surface hSERT
protein correlates linearly with I(5-HT) but not
5-HT. In oocytes with high levels of SERT expression,
the apparent affinity of the transporter for substrates and inhibitors
is decreased. The data suggest that SERT interacts with an endogenous
factor that modulates channel-like and 5-HT transport activities and
alters ligand potency. We propose a model for interpreting how SERT
expression affects SERT function and pharmacology. The model explains
discrepancies regarding variable stoichiometry and transporter-mediated
channel activity for SERT and other GAT/NET transporters.
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
(Stratagene, gift of R. Blakely Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN), or an rSERT point
mutant, rSERT D98G in pBS II SK
(D98G; Ref. 41) were
linearized by NotI digestion. cRNA was transcribed in
vitro (T7 mMessage mMachine; Ambion), diluted to indicated
concentrations with sterile water, and stored at
80 °C. The
oocytes were injected (Nanoject, Drummond Scientific) with 41.4 nl of
cRNA solution and incubated in culture medium (frog Ringer's solution
supplemented 5% dialyzed horse serum (Hyclone Laboratories), 100 µg/ml streptomycin, 50 µg/ml tetracycline, 550 µg/ml sodium
pyruvate (Sigma) for 2-18 days at either 18 or 24 °C, as indicated.
All of the measurements were conducted in frog Ringer's solution
supplemented with pargyline (100 µM) and ascorbic acid
(100 µM).
resistance), and whole cell two-microelectrode voltage clamp was
achieved using a Geneclamp 500 amplifier (Axon Instruments). A Digidata
1200 A/D converter (Axon) interfaced to a PC computer running Clampex 7 software (Axon) was used to control membrane voltage and for data
acquisition. The resting membrane potentials were between
20 mV and
60 mV, depending on incubation conditions and cRNA injected. Holding
currents under voltage clamp at
80 mV were between
10 and
90 nA.
5-HT-induced current (I(5-HT)) was elicited by superfusion of frog Ringer's solution (~2 ml/min) containing 5-HT (0.32-32 µM) at pH 7.6 or 5.0, as indicated. For some
experiments conducted at pH 5.0, methanesulfonate (5 mM)
was included in the Ringer's solution; H+ potentiation of
I(5-HT) was not different under these
conditions. The data were low pass filtered at 0.5 kHz and digitized at
1 kHz; base-line currents are subtracted off line and digitally sampled
at 10 Hz for graphical presentation. For voltage ramps, the oocytes
were clamped at
40 mV and subjected to the indicated voltage protocol
in the absence and presence of 5-HT (10 µM). The data
were low pass filtered at 1 kHz, digitized at 2 kHz, subtracted off
line, and digitally sampled at 100 Hz for presentation. All data
analysis was performed using Origin 5.0 (Microcal).
)--
Voltage-clamped oocytes were
superfused with Ringer's solution containing 5-HT (3.2 µM) and [3H]5-HT (30 nM) for 1 or 2 min as indicated, and incorporated [3H]
radioactivity was determined as described for 5-HT transport. Q5-HT was calculated from transport data
assuming a valence of +1e for 5-HT. The currents were base
line-subtracted and integrated off line to determine the total
5-HT-induced net charge movement (Q(5-HT)), and
was calculated by dividing Q5-HT by
Q(5-HT) within the same oocyte. Specific 5-HT
transport and charge movements were defined by subtracting responses
seen in noninjected oocytes of the same batch from those in SERT
cRNA-injected oocytes.
80 °C until further use (<1 month). After thawing on
ice, the oocytes were solubilized as described (42). Briefly, the
oocytes were incubated with lysis buffer (150 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, at 24 °C, 1 mM EDTA,
1% Triton X-100, 1 µg/ml aprotionin, 1 µg/ml leupeptin, 1 µM pepstatin, and 250 µM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 20 µl/oocyte) for 10 min on ice. The
extracts were triturated with a pipette until smooth, incubated for 15 min on ice, and centrifuged (15,000 × g for 15 min) to
pellet insoluble yolk material. The supernatant was removed, and an
aliquot was saved for determination of total protein using the BCA
Reagent (Pierce). Immunopure immobilized Streptavidin beads (Pierce)
were washed by centrifugation with lysis buffer (3 × 0.5 ml), and
the final bead pellet was resuspended to ~2× bead volume with lysis
buffer. The oocyte extracts were incubated with 50 µl of streptavidin
bead slurry for 60 min at 24 °C with rocking and then centrifuged
for 10 min at 15,000 × g at 4 °C. The supernatant
(intracellular fraction) is saved, and the pellet (surface fraction)
was washed twice with 1 ml of ice-cold lysis buffer. Streptavidin beads
were incubated with 40 µl of 4× loading buffer (62.5 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 7.0, 10% glycerol, 2% SDS, 0.05% 2-mercaptoethanol) for
30 min at 24 °C to elute biotinylated proteins, and the entire
sample was loaded in a single lane for SDS-PAGE in 10% acrylamide slab
gels. For intracellular fractions, we loaded 25 µg of total
protein/lane (representing 5% of the total extract). The proteins were
transferred to Immobilon-P membranes (Millipore) overnight (4 °C)
and washed three times with PBS-T (phosphate-buffered saline, 0.1%
Tween 20, 0.5 g/ml nonfat dry milk powder) for 15 min at 24 °C. The
blots were incubated for 60 min at 24 °C with anti-hSERT mouse
monoclonal antibody ST51-2 (MAb Technologies) diluted 1:2,000 in PBS-T
and then washed three times with PBS-T (15 min) before incubation with
a peroxidase-conjugated AffiniPure goat anti-mouse antibody (Jackson
ImmunoReasearch) diluted 1:20,000 in PBS-T for 60 min at 24 °C.
Immunoreactive proteins were detected using the Renaissance Western
blot Chemiluminescence Reagent Plus (PerkinElmer Life Sciences) and
Hyperfilm XL (Amersham Biosciences) per the manufacturer's
instructions. Exposed film was scanned with on a Duoscan T1200 (Agfa)
and quantified using Quantity One densitometry software (Bio-Rad).
Multiple blot exposures of varying duration indicated that film
responses are approximately linear and do not saturate in the range
used to calculate SERT density.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
) lanes are loaded with only 5% of the total
extract, band densities were comparable (Fig. 1A, lanes 5-8). Therefore, ~5% of SERT protein resided on
the oocyte surface. We observed similar results in blots from two
different oocyte batches. The relative densities of the mature surface
hSERT (70-100 kDa) bands were averaged and plotted against the amount of cRNA in Fig. 1B.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
5-HT transport and 5-HT-induced current are
differentially sensitive to hSERT expression level. The data are
from oocytes injected with increasing amounts of SERT cRNA (0.41-41.4
ng/oocyte) and cultured for 2 days at 24 °C. A,
representative Western blot showing hSERT protein in biotinylated
(streptavidin bead-bound, +) and nonbiotinylated (unbound to
streptavidin beads,
) fractions in oocytes injected with indicated
cRNA. B,
5-HT (solid circles,
dotted line) was measured in five different oocyte batches
(n = 3-6 oocytes/cRNA injection) in 2.5 min
(n = 3) or 30 min (n = 2) assays (30 nM [3H]5-HT). I(5-HT)
(open squares, solid line) was measured in
response to brief application of 5-HT (3.2 or 10 µM) in
four different oocyte batches (n = 4-5 oocytes/cRNA
injection) at
80 mV, pH 7.6. Surface SERT (solid
triangles, dashed line) was determined from two
different oocyte batches (n = 20-30 oocytes/cRNA
injection). The data represent the means ± S.E., where indicated,
of responses normalized to the maximal response from respective oocyte
batches. Average maximal responses from all batches presented:
5-HTmax = 12.9 ± 4.5 fmol/min/oocyte;
I(5-HT)max,
38.4 ± 6.7 nA. The
lines represent the fits to the Hill equation:
5-HT, EC50 cRNA = 0.13 ± 0.03 ng/oocyte; I(5-HT), EC50 cRNA = 3.42 ± 0.86 ng/oocyte; surface SERT, EC50 cRNA = 6.36 ± 0.81 ng/oocyte; nH was set to 1.0 for all fits.
5-HT) and 5-HT-induced current
(I(5-HT)) in the same batches of oocytes under
conditions that are commonly used to study neurotransmitter
transporters. Here
5-HT assays were conducted in low
substrate concentration (30 nM [3H]5-HT) over
a short time (2.5 min) without voltage clamp, and I(5-HT) was elicited by rapid superfusion (10-15 s) of high substrate concentration (3.2 or 10 µM
5-HT) at
80 mV (Fig. 2 compares
5-HT and I(5-HT) under identical
conditions). 5-HT-induced currents in noninjected oocytes were
typically less than
5 nA (10 µM 5-HT,
80 mV). To discriminate 5-HT-induced current from current carried by 5-HT itself
(labeled I5-HT by Galli et al. (23)),
we employed the following nomenclature for the current induced by 5-HT:
I(5-HT) = [I(10µM 5-HT)]
[I(Control)].

View larger version (13K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Increasing rSERT expression alters
but not H+ potentiation of
I(5-HT). The charge/transport ratio
(
) was measured in oocytes injected with SERT cRNA (1.4, 4.2, 8.3, 16.6, and 33.1 ng/oocyte) during 1-min assays under constant voltage
(
80 mV) and 5-HT concentration (12 nM
[3H]5-HT + 3.2 µM 5-HT). Immediately prior
to
measurement, we also measured I(5-HT) at
pH 7.6 and 5.0 (
80 mV), using brief (10-15 s) applications of 5-HT
(3.2 µM). A,
(solid circles)
varies with rSERT cRNA injection. The data represent the means ± S.E. from n = 3-6 oocytes of the same batch. *,
p = 0.05; **, p < 0.01 versus 1.4 ng/oocyte cRNA. The solid line
represents a fit to the Hill equation:
max = 37.5 ± 5.6 e/5-HT; EC50 cRNA = 10.2 ± 3.7 ng/oocyte; nH was set to 1.0. B,
H+ potentiation ratio of I(5-HT)
(open circles) at pH 5.0 and pH 7.6 (I(5-HT) pH5.0/I(5-HT) pH7.6)
was invariant with injected cRNA. The data represent the means ± S.E. from n = 4-10 oocytes of the same oocyte batch as
in A. The dashed line indicates the average level
of H+ potentiation across all cRNA injections.
5-HT increased sigmoidally with the amount of hSERT cRNA
injected, saturated above 5 ng/oocyte (Fig. 1B), and was
well fit to the Hill equation (Fig. 1B,
EC50 cRNA = 0.13 ± 0.03 ng/oocyte,
nH = 1.0). Increasing cRNA also increased
I(5-HT), but the cRNA dependence of
I(5-HT) was shifted rightward with respect to
5-HT. Surprisingly, mature surface hSERT protein
correlated linearly with I(5-HT) (R2 = 0.90), but not
5-HT, indicating that plasma membrane
expression of SERT is selectively reported by current.
Because rSERT cRNA yielded smaller currents than hSERT, we cultured
rSERT-injected oocytes for longer times at 18 °C to boost signal
strength. At 18 °C, expression of both
5-HT and
I(5-HT) was delayed compared with oocytes
cultured at room temperature (22-24 °C), but oocytes survived
longer after cRNA injection (data not shown). We also increased uptake
incubation time (60 min) in rSERT-injected oocytes cultured at
18 °C. Under these conditions, titration of rSERT cRNA yielded
qualitatively similar results to Fig. 1B: cRNA more potently
effected
5-HT than I(5-HT) (Hill
fits:
5-HT, EC50 cRNA = 0.59 ± 0.02 ng/oocyte; I(5-HT), EC50 cRNA = 20.0 ± 4.8 ng/oocyte; n = 4-6 oocytes from the
same batch; data not shown). In the same batch of rSERT-injected oocytes, both I(5-HT) pH5.0 and peak transient
current correlated linearly with I(5-HT) at pH
7.6 (R2 = 0.99 versus
I(5-HT) pH5.0 and R2 = 0.77 versus the transient current; data not shown). Thus,
the differential cRNA dependence of
5-HT and
I(5-HT) was not unique to the particular SERT
clone, its plasmid vector, or culture conditions (44).
To test whether the differential cRNA dependence of
5-HT
and I(5-HT) depends on voltage, we measured
5-HT and I(5-HT) simultaneously
under voltage clamp at
80 mV in oocytes injected with increasing
quantities of rSERT cRNA. To accurately measure currents in oocytes
injected with low cRNA, we recorded I(5-HT) at
pH 5.0. Fig. 2A shows that the charge/transport ratio
increased 4.3-fold as cRNA increased from 1.4 to 33.6 ng (
= 6.7 ± 1.6 and 28.6 ± 3.1, respectively). In contrast, the
ratio of I(5-HT) at pH 5.0 to
I(5-HT) at pH 7.6 was constant over the same
range of cRNA (average I(5-HT)
pH5.0/ I(5-HT) pH7.6 = 8.8 ± 0.4 for oocytes injected with 1.4-33.6 ng/oocyte; Fig. 2B).
From these data we calculated that under physiological conditions (
80
mV, pH 7.6),
varies between ~1 and ~4 over the range of cRNA
tested. The validity of this calculation was reinforced by the
observation that
= 4.4 when measured at pH 7.6 in a separate
batch of oocytes injected with 8.3 ng/oocyte rSERT cRNA (see Fig.
5A). Thus, even when measured simultaneously under voltage
clamp and in equal 5-HT concentrations,
5-HT and
I(5-HT) were differentially dependent on SERT
expression level.
The unexpected expression level differences in 5-HT transport and
current suggested that other properties of SERT might be sensitive to
cRNA injection. We therefore examined 5-HT saturation kinetics in
5-HT assays. As expected,
5-HT increased
rapidly with increasing 5-HT concentration at all cRNA levels (Fig.
3A). Surprisingly,
EC50 cRNA for
5-HT decreased as 5-HT
concentration increased (Fig. 3A). 5-HT exhibits higher
potency at lower hSERT expression (Hill fits: 0.42 ng/oocyte,
EC50 = 1.7 ± 0.5 µM; 21 ng/oocyte,
EC50 = 8.0 ± 4.0 µM;
nH = 1.0 for all fits and n = 3-6 oocytes/batch from three separate oocyte batches, data not shown).
Thus, 5-HT potency was inversely correlated with SERT expression.
|
Substrate potency also shifted with expression level in competition
assays, where both nontransported inhibitors and substrates inhibited
transport of [3H]5-HT (Fig.
4, A and B). 5-HT
potency for inhibition of
5-HT was higher in oocytes
injected with 0.42 ng of hSERT cRNA than with 21 ng of hSERT cRNA (Fig.
4A). Cocaine potency was also sensitive to cRNA injection,
and the magnitude of the shift was larger than for 5-HT (Fig.
4B). The substrate d-amphetamine shared sensitivity with
5-HT (0.42 ng/oocyte, IC50 = 40 ± 5.7 µM; 21 ng/oocyte, IC50 = 170 ± 30 µM, data not shown), and the nontransported
antidepressant paroxetine (IC50 = 7.9 ± 1.3 nM; 21 ng/oocyte, IC50 = 55.2 ± 9.6 nM; data not shown) shifted similarly to cocaine. In
contrast, I(5-HT) was insensitive to hSERT
expression (Fig. 4C). At either low or high hSERT expression
(0.42 ng/oocyte or 21 ng/oocyte), 5-HT potency for
I(5-HT) was similar to
5-HT at
low expression. Fig. 4D summarizes changes in ligand potency
at low and high SERT expression. Inhibitory potency decreased 4-5-fold
for 5-HT and 10-fold for cocaine when cRNA was increased from 0.42 to
21 ng/oocyte. Substrate and inhibitor recognition was therefore
sensitive to SERT expression level when 5-HT transport was assayed but
not when 5-HT-induced current was measured.
|
That transport and current are differentially sensitive to SERT
expression suggested that SERT may interact with a protein or cellular
factor that modulates its function. One possibility is that
is
sensitive to intersubunit interactions in an oligomeric complex (11,
15). The structure of ion channels, most recently determined by x-ray
crystallography for ClC chloride channels (45) and by freeze-fracture
electron microscopy for glutamate transporters (46), further suggested
that functional SERTs may be composed of more than one gene product. We
therefore injected oocytes with rSERT cRNA either alone or together
with cRNA encoding a transport-inactive rSERT mutant, D98G, and
measured
5-HT and I(5-HT)
simultaneously at
80 mV (as in Fig. 2). Although D98G retained
surface expression in mammalian cells, mutation of this conserved TM1
aspartate ablated transport (41). Fig. 5
shows that co-injection of rSERT with D98G attenuated Q(5-HT) 51% compared with oocytes injected with
rSERT alone (8.3 ng/oocyte); however, Q5-HT was unaffected (Fig. 5, A and B). D98G thus decreased
by 35% compared with wild-type rSERT (Fig. 5C). To
determine whether D98G altered ion permeation, we examined the voltage
dependence of I(5-HT) in oocytes injected with
rSERT cRNA either alone or with D98G cRNA. Fig.
6A shows raw currents during
voltage ramps in the absence and presence of 10 µM 5-HT
(pH 5.0) in an oocyte injected with rSERT cRNA alone (8.3 ng/oocyte).
I(5-HT) is plotted as a function of membrane
voltage in Fig. 6B. With rSERT cRNA alone,
I(5-HT)(V) exhibited the characteristic inward
rectification seen in SERTs (22, 23) (Fig. 6B).). The shape
of I(5-HT) (V) is not affected by extracellular
acidification from pH 7.6 to 5.0 (data not shown). In oocytes injected
with a mixture of rSERT + D98G cRNA (8.3 + 33.1 ng/oocyte,
respectively), I(5-HT) was attenuated relative
to rSERT alone (8.3 ng/oocyte) at all membrane potentials tested (Fig.
6B). At
80 mV, I(5-HT) was
inhibited 89% by D98G (rSERT,
44.45 ± 9.47 nA; rSERT + D98G,
5.12 ± 2.19 nA). We were unable to detect
I(5-HT) at any membrane potential in oocytes
injected with D98G alone (33.1 ng/oocyte, data not shown). In contrast
to the marked reduction in amplitude, co-expression with D98G did not
change the shape (Fig. 5C) of the
I(5-HT) (V) curve.
|
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Plasma membrane expression of hSERT protein linearly correlated
with I(5-HT) (Fig. 1A). The amount of
cRNA required to elicit
5-HT was, however, 5-fold lower
than for I(5-HT) (Fig. 1B). Because
5-HT and I(5-HT) each required
functional SERTs, it is surprising that they were not linearly
correlated. The differential cRNA dependence was not explained by an
inability to measure current at low cRNA. At pH 7.6 even below 1 ng of
cRNA, I(5-HT) was significantly greater than
in noninjected oocytes. I(5-HT) exhibited the
same cRNA dependence at pH 5.0 as it did at 7.6, despite a nearly
10-fold increase in magnitude (Figs. 1B and
2B).
If increasing transporter number significantly depletes 5-HT in the
bath,
5-HT might saturate because of limited substrate availability. We measured initial transport rates (47) within 2.5 min
to minimize substrate depletion or accumulation. Increasing incubation
time 30-fold, which should magnify bath depletion and intracellular
buildup of 5-HT, did not change EC50 cRNA (Fig.
1B and data not shown). Even during long (60 min) transport assays with 33.6 ng of rSERT cRNA, less than 5% of added
[3H]5-HT was accumulated inside the oocyte. Voltage could
also affect
5-HT and I(5-HT)
differently to shift apparent cRNA potency. However,
was sensitive
to the amount of injected cRNA even under constant voltage (Fig.
2A). Furthermore, all properties of SERT function were not
sensitive to expression; for example,
I(5-HT) pH5.0/I(5-HT) pH7.6 (Figs. 1B and 2B). Extrinsic chemical or
electrical driving forces are therefore unlikely to account for the
results shown in Figs. 1B and 2A. The amount of
transporter protein on the plasma membrane likely altered an intrinsic
property that depends on interactions of SERT with itself or with other
factors. Such interactions were manifested as changes in the balance of
5-HT transport to 5-HT-induced current.
Channel-like activity in heterologous expression systems is generally
ascribed to GAT/NET transporters because (a)
transmitter-induced currents correlate with transport and radioligand
binding in transfected or injected cells and are absent from
naïve controls, (b) transport and current exhibit
similar ionic requirements and inhibitor sensitivities (see Refs. 20,
48, and 49 for reviews), and (c) channel events correlate
with NE spikes patches containing hNET (50). For SERT we observed
significant
5-HT even under conditions when I(5-HT) was negligible but never the reverse,
indicating that current was present only in cells with transport
activity. Furthermore, I(5-HT) was highly
correlated with plasma membrane SERT protein (Fig. 1A). It
is therefore unlikely that SERT currents were due to induction of
endogenous channels (51); rather, I(5-HT) was
intrinsically associated with SERT function.
Nonclassical transporter properties are not unique to the GAT/NET
family. EAAC1-mediated glutamate transport is biphasic with respect to
the amount of injected cRNA (52), and Cl
flux through
NaPi-1 exhibits a different cRNA dependence than Pi transport (53). Large currents and variable
stoichiometry common for GAT/NET and EAAT transporters (20, 48, 49)
also appear in other transporters. Depending on Na+
concentration, sugar concentration, and membrane voltage,
may be
either 1 or 2 for the SGLT1 Na+/glucose co-transporter
(54), and hormones modulate both glucose transport kinetics and ion
stoichiometry in Tilapia intestinal brush-border membranes
(55). Stoichiometry of the Na+/HCO3
transporter, NBC1, depends on the cellular host in which it is expressed (56).
Classical models predict
between 0 and 2 for GAT/NET transporters
(19, 20, 48, 57). Experimentally, however,
is as high as 7 for hDAT
(24) and rSERT (22) and 20-50 for Drosophila SERT (23, 58).
In our experiments low SERT expression resulted in
= ~7 at
pH 5.0, and from Fig. 2B we calculated that
= ~1 at pH 7.6. However,
increased over 4-fold as the expression level
rose (Fig. 2A). Therefore, SERT behaved as a classical
transporter at low expression level but became increasingly
channel-like as the amount of surface SERT protein increased. Indeed,
our results were consistent with reports of excess currents following
injection of large quantities of cRNA (22-24, 47, 58).
The balance of current to transport was sensitive to co-injection of
rSERT with an inactive mutant, D98G (Fig. 5). If SERTs form mixed
oligomers (11, 15), D98G may interact directly with wild-type SERT in
an oligomeric complex to alter
. Transmembrane-spanning segment 1 contained Asp98 and was implicated in substrate
recognition, inhibitor binding, and 5-HT translocation (41, 59, 60);
thus, mutations in this domain could interfere with substrate and ion
permeation through a shared ion pore. Because
5-HT and
the voltage dependence of I(5-HT) were
unaffected by D98G, SERT-D98G interactions (and by implication
SERT-SERT interactions in the native transporter) may affect channel
gating but not 5-HT or co-transported ion permeation.
SERT expression level also changed its pharmacology. In transport
assays with high SERT expression, the inhibitory potency of substrates
(5-HT and d-amphetamine) and inhibitors (cocaine and paroxetine) was
decreased (Fig. 4D). Likewise, high 5-HT concentrations decreased the apparent potency of cRNA (Fig. 3A). For
Drosophila SERT expressed in oocytes, the temperature
sensitivity of both
5-HT and
I(5-HT) (Q10
3) is ascribed to
large conformational changes (58), raising the possibility that changes
in rate-limiting steps leading to transport or current determine 5-HT potency.
SERT expression could also govern the probability of forming an
oligomeric complex if multimer formation is mass-dependent. If monomers support transport and oligomers support current, altering the proportions of these structures would perturb
. A variable oligomer model is consistent with the ability of D98G to
selectively attenuate current. However, there is little precedent for
variable oligomerization in the transporter or ion channel literature, and it is known that ion channels are subject to strict control mechanisms that prevent expression of incomplete assemblies (61). EAAT3
glutamate transporters apparently form a pentameric structure, and the
number of freeze fracture particles representing the multimer correlate
linearly with the pre-steady-state current (46). In light of our
findings, it would be interesting to know how EAAT3 transport and
glutamate-induced current correlate with particle density and size.
The potency of SERT cRNA may reflect associations with molecules known to interact with GAT/NET transporters (34-36). For example, protein kinase C-mediated increase in surface localization of rGAT1 is lost at high expression, indicating that transporters interact with an endogenous factor that alters their subcellular trafficking (62). Substrates are also known to modulate GAT/NET transporter properties, regulation, and trafficking (37, 63, 64). For rGAT1, N-terminal amino acids and syntaxin 1A function coordinately to regulate GABA transport rate (35).
Although existing transporter models can account for large
transporter-mediated ion fluxes (22, 23, 65, 66), they do not predict
the expression level dependence of either
or ligand potency that we
observed. To explain these new data, we propose the following:
functional SERT is a ternary complex composed of the SERT oligomer (T),
substrate (S), and an endogenous factor of limited abundance (X) (Fig.
7). The total number of oligomeric transporters on the plasma membrane is N = T + TS + TX + TSX. In
our experiments, we varied N by increasing cRNA injection, and we
varied the S by addition of 5-HT. X was required for 5-HT transport and
promoted transport over current when associated with T. A leftward
shift in the apparent cRNA potency for
5-HT therefore
reported the functional association of X and T. Because TSX generated
5-HT but little I(5-HT),
= ~1. As N increased, X became limiting,
5-HT reached
a plateau, and TS generated I(5-HT). Finally, X
must govern substrate and inhibitor associations because ligands interact with higher potency at low N. This representation for transporters is reminiscent of the ternary complex model for G protein-coupled receptors (67), which describes how association with an
interacting factor (G protein) can act as a molecular switch to
regulate ligand affinity. Another parallel was found with ion channel
subunits, which translate cellular signals that modulate channel
activity and localization (68).
|
Our model provides a framework for understanding functional complexity
in SERT. Depending on expression level, SERT ranged from
transporter-like (small charge movement accompanying 5-HT transport) to
channel-like (large charge movement with 5-HT flux). The model thus
provides an explanation for the surprising heterogeneity in currents
associated with GABA transporter function (27). Apparent discrepancies
(30, 31, 69, 70) are reconciled if different protocols alter the
relative abundance of transporters and regulatory factors. We speculate
that in the native environment, the balance of 5-HT transport to
5-HT-induced current will depend on the expression and localization of
transporters and their associated factors. Indeed, large presynaptic
5-HT-induced currents are observed in native synapses (33). In vesicles
and synaptosomes, 5-HT is more potent for uptake than in heterologous
hosts (EC50 = 50-100 nM versus
0.5-1 µM), suggesting that expression of SERT alone may
not recapitulate the native transport system (5, 7, 19, 57, 71-75).
Transporter-associated currents may be tailored to neuronal activity
and participate in shaping synaptic transmission if interactions
between transporters and endogenous regulatory factors are dynamically
regulated in the native environment.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We especially thank Randy D. Blakely for insightful discussions during the course of this work and for generously providing rSERT and D98G cDNA constructs. hSERT in pOTV was kindly provided by Mark Sonders. We also acknowledge Aurelio Galli for technical discussions and patient instruction during the early stages of this project.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant NS-34075 (to L. J. D.) and National Institutes of Health Fellowship MH-12393 (to I. S. 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.
Present address: Dept. of Cardiology, Children's Hospital,
Harvard Medical School, Enders 1309, Boston, MA 02115.
§ To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232-6600. Tel.: 615-343-6278; Fax: 615-343-1679; E-mail: lou.defelice@mcmail.vanderbilt.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 13, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M110783200
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are:
5-HT, 5-hydroxytryptamine or serotonin;
SERT, serotonin transporter;
GAT,
-aminobutyric acid transporter;
NET, (
)-norepinephrine
transporter;
DAT (dopamine transporter), h, human;
r, rat.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Blakely, R. D.,
DeFelice, L. J.,
and Hartzell, H. C.
(1994)
J. Exp. Biol.
196,
263-281 |
| 2. |
Feighner, J. P.
(1999)
J. Clin. Psychiatry
60 Suppl. 22,
18-22 |
| 3. |
Gorman, J. M.,
and Kent, J. M.
(1999)
J. Clin. Psychiat.
60 Suppl. 4,
33-38[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. |
Tatsumi, M.,
Groshan, K.,
Blakely, R. D.,
and Richelson, E.
(1997)
Eur. J. Pharmacol.
340,
249-258[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. |
Blakely, R. D.,
Berson, H. E.,
Fremeau, R. T., Jr.,
Caron, M. G.,
Peek, M. M.,
Prince, H. K.,
and Bradley, C. C.
(1991)
Nature
354,
66-70[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 6. |
Rudnick, G.,
and Wall, S. C.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
1817-1821 |
| 7. |
Hoffman, B. J.,
Mezey, E.,
and Brownstein, M. J.
(1991)
Science
254,
579-580 |
| 8. |
Ramamoorthy, S.,
Bauman, A. L.,
Moore, K. R.,
Han, H.,
Yang-Feng, T.,
Chang, A. S.,
Ganapathy, V.,
and Blakely, R. D.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
2542-2546 |
| 9. |
Talvenheimo, J.,
and Rudnick, G.
(1980)
J. Biol. Chem.
255,
8606-8611 |
| 10. |
Mellerup, E. T.,
Plenge, P.,
and Nielsen, M.
(1984)
Eur. J. Pharmacol.
106,
411-413[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 11. |
Schmid, J. A.,
Scholze, P.,
Kudlacek, O.,
Freissmuth, M.,
Singer, E. A.,
and Sitte, H. H.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
3805-3810 |
| 12. |
Jess, U.,
Betz, H.,
and Schloss, P.
(1996)
FEBS Lett.
394,
44-46[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
Cesura, A. M.,
Muller, K.,
Peyer, M.,
and Pletscher, A.
(1983)
Eur. J. Pharmacol.
96,
235-242[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 14. |
Ramamoorthy, S.,
Leibach, F. H.,
Mahesh, V. B.,
and Ganapathy, V.
(1993)
Placenta
14,
449-461[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. |
Kilic, F.,
and Rudnick, G.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
3106-3111 |
| 16. |
Chang, A. S.,
Starnes, D. M.,
and Chang, S. M.
(1998)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
249,
416-421[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. |
Milner, H. E.,
Beliveau, R.,
and Jarvis, S. M.
(1994)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1190,
185-187[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. |
Berger, S. P.,
Farrell, K.,
Conant, D.,
Kempner, E. S.,
and Paul, S. M.
(1994)
Mol. Pharmacol.
46,
726-731[Abstract] |
| 19. |
Rudnick, G.,
and Nelson, P. J.
(1978)
Biochem.
17,
5300-5303[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. |
DeFelice, L. J.,
and Blakely, R. D.
(1996)
Biophys. J.
70,
579-580 |
| 21. |
Sitte, H. H.,
Hiptmair, B.,
Zwach, J.,
Pifl, C.,
Singer, E. A.,
and Scholze, P.
(2001)
Mol. Pharmacol.
59,
1129-1137 |
| 22. |
Mager, S.,
Min, C.,
Henry, D. J.,
Chavkin, C.,
Hoffman, B. J.,
Davidson, N.,
and Lester, H. A.
(1994)
Neuron
12,
845-859[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 23. |
Galli, A.,
Petersen, C. I.,
deBlaquiere, M.,
Blakely, R. D.,
and DeFelice, L. J.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
3401-3411 |
| 24. |
Sonders, M. S.,
Zhu, S. J.,
Zahniser, N. R.,
Kavanaugh, M. P.,
and Amara, S. G.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
960-974 |
| 25. |
Galli, A.,
Blakely, R. D.,
and DeFelice, L. J.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
8671-8676 |
| 26. |
Lin, F.,
Lester, H. A.,
and Mager, S.
(1996)
Biophys. J.
71,
3126-3135 |
| 27. |
Cammack, J. N.,
and Schwartz, E. A.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
723-727 |
| 28. |
Gu, H.,
Wall, S. C.,
and Rudnick, G.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
7124-7130 |
| 29. |
Keyes, S. R.,
and Rudnick, G.
(1982)
J. Biol. Chem.
257,
1172-1176 |
| 30. |
Lu, C. C.,
and Hilgemann, D. W.
(1999)
J. Gen. Physiol.
114,
445-457 |
| 31. |
Lu, C. C.,
and Hilgemann, D. W.
(1999)
J. Gen. Physiol.
114,
429-444 |
| 32. |
Galli, A.,
Jayanthi, L. D.,
Ramsey, I. S.,
Miller, J. W.,
Fremeau, R. T., Jr.,
and DeFelice, L. J.
(1999)
J. Neurosci.
19,
6290-6297 |
| 33. |
Bruns, D.,
Engert, F.,
and Lux, H. D.
(1993)
Neuron
10,
559-572[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 34. |
Blakely, R. D.,
and Bauman, A. L.
(2000)
Curr. Opin. Neurobiol.
10,
328-336[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 35. |
Deken, S. L.,
Beckman, M. L.,
Boos, L.,
and Quick, M. W.
(2000)
Nat. Neurosci.
3,
998-1003[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. |
Torres, G. E.,
Yao, W. D.,
Mohn, A. R.,
Quan, H.,
Kim, K. M.,
Levey, A. I.,
Staudinger, J.,
and Caron, M. G.
(2001)
Neuron
30,
121-134[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 37. |
Ramamoorthy, S.,
and Blakely, R. D.
(1999)
Science
285,
763-766 |
| 38. |
Qian, Y.,
Galli, A.,
Ramamoorthy, S.,
Risso, S.,
DeFelice, L. J.,
and Blakely, R. D.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
45-57 |
| 39. |
Sur, C.,
Betz, H.,
and Schloss, P.
(1998)
J. Neurochem.
70,
2545-2553[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 40. |
Plenge, P.,
and Mellerup, E. T.
(1997)
Pharmacol. Toxicol.
80,
197-201[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 41. |
Barker, E. L.,
Moore, K. R.,
Rakhshan, F.,
and Blakely, R. D.
(1999)
J. Neurosci.
19,
4705-4717 |
| 42. |
Ni, Y. G.,
Chen, J. G.,
Androutsellis-Theotokis, A.,
Huang, C. J.,
Moczydlowski, E.,
and Rudnick, G.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
30942-30947 |
| 43. |
Qian, Y.,
Melikian, H. E.,
Rye, D. B.,
Levey, A. I.,
and Blakely, R. D.
(1995)
J. Neurosci.
15,
1261-1274[Abstract] |
| 44. |
Cao, Y.,
Mager, S.,
and Lester, H. A.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
2257-2266 |