JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M406281200 on November 1, 2004

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 280, Issue 1, 80-87, January 7, 2005
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
280/1/80    most recent
M406281200v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Azam, L.
Right arrow Articles by McIntosh, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Azam, L.
Right arrow Articles by McIntosh, J. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

{alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA, a Novel Peptide from Conus bullatus, Distinguishes among Neuronal Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors*

Layla Azam{ddagger}, Cheryl Dowell{ddagger}, Maren Watkins§, Jerry A. Stitzel¶, Baldomero M. Olivera{ddagger}, and J. Michael McIntosh{ddagger}||**

From the Departments of {ddagger}Biology, §Pathology, and ||Psychiatry, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112 and the Department of Integrative Physiology and Institute for Behavioral Genetics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309

Received for publication, June 7, 2004 , and in revised form, October 25, 2004.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) are pentameric ligand-gated ion channels. {alpha} Subunits, together with {beta}2 and/or {beta}4 subunits, form ligand-binding sites at {alpha}/{beta} subunit interfaces. Predatory marine snails of the genus Conus are a rich source of nAChR-targeted peptides. Using conserved features of the {alpha}-conotoxin signal sequence and 3'-untranslated sequence region, we have cloned a novel gene from the fish-eating snail, Conus bullatus; the gene codes for a previously unreported {alpha}-conotoxin with unusual 4/4 spacing of amino acids in the two disulfide loops. Chemical synthesis of the predicted mature toxin was performed. The resulting peptide, {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA, was tested on cloned nAChRs expressed in Xenopus oocytes. The peptide potently blocks numerous rat nAChR subtypes, with highest potency for {alpha}3- and chimeric {alpha}6-containing nAChRs; BuIA blocks {alpha}6/{alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs with a 40,000-fold lower IC50 than {alpha}4{beta}2 nAChRs. The kinetics of toxin unblock are dependent on the {beta} subunit. nAChRs with a {beta}4 subunit have very slow off-times, compared with the corresponding {beta}2 subunit-containing nAChR. In each instance, rat {alpha}x{beta}4 may be distinguished from rat {alpha}x{beta}2 by the large difference in time to recover from toxin block. Similar results are obtained when comparing mouse {alpha}3{beta}2 to mouse {alpha}3{beta}4, and human {alpha}3{beta}2 to human {alpha}3{beta}4, indicating that the {beta} subunit dependence extends across species. Thus, {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA also represents a novel probe for distinguishing between {beta}2- and {beta}4-containing nAChRs.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Acetylcholine acts on nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs)1 to mediate fast excitatory neurotransmission or to modulate neurotransmitter release. nAChRs appear to be involved in pain sensation, attention, memory, learning, and development (1). Medications that affect nicotinic transmission may be useful for the treatment of pain, memory disorders, Parkinson's disease, schizophrenia, and nicotine addiction. To maximize the ratio of therapeutic benefit to side effects, medications must discriminate between a plethora of subtypes of nAChRs.

Neuronal nAChRs are ligand-gated cationic channels composed of {alpha} and, in many cases, {beta} subunits. These pentameric proteins have at least two ligand binding sites located at the interface of two subunits. For neuronal nAChRs, the ligand binding {beta} subunit appears to be either {beta}2 or {beta}4. Both of these subunits are widely expressed, often within the same areas of the nervous system (reviewed in Refs. 2 and 3). Probes to distinguish among different {alpha} and {beta} subunit-containing nAChRs are needed to identify which subtypes underlie the particular effects of nicotine.

Predatory marine snails of the genus Conus utilize nAChR antagonists to immobilize and capture their prey. The ~500 species of cone snails prey upon a broad diversity of organisms (five different phyla). Each Conus species appears to have a unique complement of nAChR antagonists, making Conus a rich source of novel ligands, often with unique specificities. In this report, we describe the cloning of a gene that encodes a novel {alpha}-conotoxin that distinguishes among {alpha} subunit-containing nAChRs and kinetically discriminates between {beta}2- and {beta}4-containing nAChRs.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Identification and Sequencing of a cDNA Clone Encoding {alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA—cDNA was prepared by a reverse transcription of RNA isolated from the Conus bullatus venom duct as described previously (4). The resulting cDNA served as a template for PCR using oligonucleotides corresponding to the conserved signal sequence and the 3'-UTR sequence of {alpha}-conotoxin prepropeptides. The resulting PCR product was purified using the HIGH-PURE PCR product purification kit (Roche Applied Science) following the suggested protocol of the manufacturer. The eluted DNA fragment was annealed to plasmid pAMP1 vector, and the resulting product was transformed into competent DH5{alpha} cells, with the clone AMP pAMP System for Rapid Cloning of Amplification Products (Invitrogen) following the suggested protocols of the manufacturer. The resulting product was transferred into competent DH5{alpha} cells as described (4). The nucleic acid sequences of the resulting clones were determined according to the standard protocol for Sequenase Version 2.0 DNA Sequencing kit as described (5).

Chemical Synthesis—The peptide was synthesized, 0.45 mmol/g, on a Fmoc amide resin using Fmoc chemistry and standard side protection except on cysteine residues. Cys residues were protected in pairs with either S-trityl on Cys2 and Cys8, or S-acetamidomethyl on Cys3 and Cys13. The peptide was removed from the resin and precipitated. A two-step oxidation protocol was used to selectively fold the peptides as described previously (6). Briefly, the disulfide bridge between Cys2 and Cys8 was closed by dripping the peptide into an equal volume of 20 mM potassium ferricyanide, 0.1 M Tris, pH 7.5. The solution was allowed to react for 30 min, and the monocyclic peptide was purified by reverse-phase HPLC. Simultaneous removal of the S-acetamidomethyl groups and closure of the disulfide bridge between Cys3 and Cys13 was carried out by iodine oxidation. The monocyclic peptide and HPLC eluent was dripped into an equal volume of iodine (10 mM) in H20/trifluoroacetic acid/acetonitrile (78:2:20 by volume) and allowed to react for 10 min. The reaction was terminated by the addition of ascorbic acid, diluted 20-fold with 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid, and the bicyclic peptide was purified by HPLC on a reverse-phase C18 Vydac column using a linear gradient of 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid 0.092% trifluoroacetic acid, 60% acetonitrile, remainder H2O.

Mass Spectrometry—Measurements were performed at the Salk Institute under the direction of Jean Rivier. MALDI-TOF/MS (matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry) was utilized.

Voltage Clamp Recording—Oocytes were harvested and injected with cRNA encoding nAChR subunits as described previously (7). The oocyte recording chamber was fabricated from Sylgard and was 300 µl in volume. Oocytes were gravity-perfused with ND96 (96.0 mM NaCl, 2.0 mM KCl, 1.8 mM CaCl2, 1.0 mM MgCl2, 5 mM HEPES, pH 7.1–7.5) containing 1 µM atropine (ND96A) with or without toxin at a rate of ~5 ml/min. All solutions also contained 0.1 mg/ml bovine serum albumin to reduce nonspecific adsorption of peptide. The perfusion medium could be switched to one containing peptide or ACh by use of a distributor valve (SmartValve, Cavro Scientific Instruments, Sunnyvale, CA) and a series of three-way solenoid valves (model 161T031, Neptune Research, Northboro, MA). All recordings were made at room temperature (~22 °C). ACh-gated currents were obtained with a two-electrode voltage clamp amplifier (model OC-725B, Warner Instrument, Hamden, CT). Glass microelectrodes, pulled from fiber-filled borosilicate capillaries (1-mm outer diameter Å~ 0.75-mm inner diameter) (WPI, Sarasota, FL) and filled with 3 M KCl, served as voltage and current electrodes. Resistances for voltage and current electrodes were 0.5–3.0 M{Omega} and 0.5–2.0 M{Omega}, respectively. The membrane potential was clamped at -70 mV, and the current signal, recorded through virtual ground, was low pass-filtered (5 Hz cut-off) and digitized at a sampling frequency of 20 Hz. Data acquisition, measurement of peak responses, and control of the distributor and solenoid valves were automated by a homemade virtual instrument constructed with the graphical programming language LabVIEW (National Instruments).

To apply a pulse of ACh to the oocyte, the perfusion fluid was switched to one containing ACh for 1 s. This was automatically done at intervals of 1–5 min. The shortest time interval was chosen such that reproducible control responses were obtained with no observable desensitization. This time interval depended on the nAChR subtype being tested. The concentration of ACh was 100 µM. The ACh was diluted in ND96A for tests of all nAChR subtypes except {alpha}7, in which case the diluent was ND96. For control responses, the ACh pulse was preceded by perfusion with ND96 (for {alpha}7) or ND96A (all others). No atropine was used with oocytes expressing {alpha}7, because it has been demonstrated to be an antagonist of these receptors (8). For responses in toxin (test responses), the perfusion solution was switched to one containing toxin while maintaining the same interval of ACh pulses. Toxin was continuously perfused until responses reached a steady state. All ACh pulses contained no toxin, for it was assumed that little, if any, bound toxin would have washed away in the brief time (<2 s) it takes for the responses to peak. The average peak amplitude of three control responses just preceding exposure to toxin were used to normalize the amplitude of each test response to obtain "% response" or "% block." Each data point of a dose-response curve represents the average value ±S.E. of measurements from at least three oocytes. Data fits were performed with Prism software (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA).

Cloning of Mouse {alpha}3, {beta}2, and {beta}4 cDNAs—The mouse {beta}2 cDNA was cloned as described previously (9). For the cloning of the {alpha}3 and {beta}4 cDNAs, first strand cDNAs were generated from 2 µg each, DBA/2Ibg adrenal gland total RNA and P19 teratocarcinoma cell total RNA using AMV reverse transcriptase (Promega, Madison, WI), 1x reverse transcriptase buffer (Promega) 200 µM each, dATP, dCTP, dGTP, and dTTP, 5 mM MgCl2 and 2.5 µM random hexamers (Promega). cDNA synthesis was performed for 1 h at 42 °C. Following synthesis, the first strand cDNAs were purified using the Qiagen (Valencia, CA) PCR purification protocol according to the manufacturer's instructions. The {alpha}3 (1612 bp) and {beta}4 (1578 bp) cDNAs subsequently were amplified from the DBA/2Ibg adrenal gland first strand cDNA and P19 teratocarcinoma cell first strand cDNA, respectively, using Pfu Turbo Polymerase (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA), 1x Pfu buffer, 200 µM each, dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP, and 0.4 µM each, {alpha}3- and {beta}4-specific forward and reverse primers. Primers used for cDNA amplification were as follows: {alpha}3 (Forward: 5'-GCTTAGCTGTGCTTCGGTGGTG-3', Reverse: 5'-CTTTCATCAGCACAGGTGAGC-3') and {beta}4 (Forward: 5'-CATTGTGGGGTGACCGGCAGC-3', Reverse: 5'-GTGGGATGATATGAGCAGCC-3'). Following amplification, cDNAs were inserted into the vector pCRBluntIITOPO (Invitrogen) and sequenced. A minimum of 6 cDNAs per subunit were sequenced in order to determine the consensus sequence of each subunit cDNA. cDNA clones containing the consensus sequence subsequently were subcloned into either pcDNA3.1zeo (+) (Invitrogen) ({alpha}3) or pcDNA3.1hygro (+) (Invitrogen) ({beta}4). Transcription with T7 RNA polymerase yielded sense-strand cRNA for injection into oocytes.

Construction of Rat {alpha}6/{alpha}3 Chimera—cDNA clones encoding rat nAChR subunits were provided by S. Heinemann (Salk Institute, San Diego, CA) with plasmid constructs as described (10). The rat {alpha}6 subunit does not express with the rat {beta}2 subunit (11). We therefore used a chimera that contains the N-terminal extracellular {alpha}6 subunit sequence linked to the remaining portion of the {alpha}3 subunit protein as a model of activity at {alpha}6 subunit-containing nAChRs. The {alpha}6/{alpha}3 chimera was provided by James Garrett (Cognetix Inc., Salt Lake City, UT). The chimeric nAChR consists of amino acids 1–237 of the rat {alpha}6 subunit protein linked to amino acids 233–499 of the rat {alpha}3 subunit protein. The chimeric junction is located at the paired arginine residues immediately preceding the M1 transmembrane segment of the {alpha}3 subunit. The resulting chimeric nAChR represents the extracellular ligand-binding domain of the {alpha}6 subunit linked to the membrane-embedded region of the {alpha}3 subunit. The {alpha}6/{alpha}3 cDNA was constructed by introduction of BspEI sites at the chimeric junction into the {alpha}6 and {alpha}3 cDNA sequences using mutagenic primers to introduce the restriction sites through silent codon changes. The {alpha}6 and {alpha}3 segments were generated by PCR of rat brain cDNA clones using primers in the 5'- and 3'-untranslated regions of the corresponding cDNAs along with the internal mutagenic primers. The PCR products were digested with BspEI and ligated to generate the chimeric construct. The final chimeric construct was cloned and completely sequenced to confirm the correct cDNA sequence. The protein sequence was an exact match to the rat {alpha}6 and {alpha}3 sequences in GenBankTM, except for a valine to alanine change at amino acid 278 in the chimeric construct. To further improve expression levels, most of the 5'- and 3'-untranslated regions of the nAChR cDNA were deleted, leaving only 12 bp of 5'-UTR and 34 bp of 3'-UTR sequence. The chimeric construct was cloned into the Xenopus expression vector pT7TS, placing Xenopus globin 5'- and 3'-UTR regions around the nAChR cDNA. The expression construct, pT7TS/r{alpha}6{alpha}3, was transcribed with T7 RNA polymerase to generate sense-strand RNA for oocyte expression. To improve expression levels of the {alpha}6/{alpha}3 chimera, it was co-injected with {beta}2 and {beta}4 subunits (provided by Charles Luetje) that were engineered into the pGEMHE high expression vector as described (12).


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Cloning of {alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA—In common with other known families of conotoxins, the {alpha}-conotoxins are proteolytically processed from a larger precursor protein. In the case of the {alpha}-conotoxins, this prepropeptide is ~40 amino acids long, with the mature {alpha}-conotoxin moiety of ~13–18 amino acids located at the C terminus of the precursor. A processing site, usually consisting of a basic amino acid, immediately precedes the mature toxin in the precursor sequence. An unusual feature of the conotoxins is that while the mature toxin peptides are highly variable in sequence, the precursor proteins are highly conserved. The signal sequence region is practically invariant among the different {alpha}-conotoxin precursors, and this remains true even for phylogenetically distant Conus species (13, 14). Also, the 3'-untranslated region of the {alpha}-conotoxin mRNA is highly conserved. We utilized the conserved features of the {alpha}-conotoxin gene structure to design oligonucleotide primers for polymerase chain reaction amplification of the {alpha}-conotoxin-coding region. The resulting cDNA clone from C. bullatus is shown in Fig. 1.



View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1.
Prepropeptide and encoded toxin of {alpha}-BuIA. Post-translational processing sites are indicated by the arrows, and the mature toxin is indicated. The arrow following the K is a putative proteolytic processing site. The glycine following the C-terminal cysteine in the mature toxin is assumed to be processed to a C-terminal amide.

 
Chemical Synthesis of {alpha}-BuIA—Solid phase chemical synthesis of the predicted mature toxin was undertaken. The glycine at the C terminus was assumed to be post-translationally modified to a C-terminal amide. It was also assumed that the disulfide bridging of {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA was analogous to all previously characterized {alpha}-conotoxins, that is, Cys2 to Cys8 and Cys3 to Cys13; Cys groups were orthogonally protected in pairs to direct disulfide bond formation in this configuration. Acid-labile S-trityl was removed simultaneously with peptide cleavage from the resin and closure of the disulfide bridge between these Cys residues was accomplished with FeCN. The monocyclic peptide was purified by HPLC, and the acid-stable acetomidomethyl groups were removed, and the disulfide bridges formed by iodine oxidation. The folded peptide was subsequently analyzed with matrix-assisted laser desorption mass spectrometry. The mass of the synthetic peptide was consistent with the amidated sequence (monoisotopic MH+: calculated, 1311.5; observed, 1311.4).

Peptide Effect on nAChRs—{alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA was tested on various subunit combinations of neuronal nAChRs heterologously expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Concentration response analysis indicated that, unlike some {alpha}-conotoxins, {alpha}-BuIA was active against a broad spectrum of nAChR subtypes. The {alpha} nAChR subunit had a profound influence on the effect of BuIA. The peptide was most potent on nAChRs containing the extracellular portion of the {alpha}6 subunit and next most potent on the closely related {alpha}3 subunit-containing nAChRs. The ligand had little effect on {alpha}4{beta}2 nAChRs (IC50 >10 µM). Results are shown in Fig. 2 and Table I.



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 2.
Concentration response analysis of {alpha}-BuIA. A, {alpha}-BuIA was tested on {beta}2-containing heteromeric nAChRs and homomeric {alpha}7 nAChRs heterologously expressed in Xenopus oocytes as described under "Experimental Procedures." B, {alpha}-BuIA effect on {beta}4-containing nAChRs. r, rat. Error bars are the S.E. Data are from 3–12 oocytes. IC50 and Hill slope values are shown in Table I.

 


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE I
Concentration response analysis of {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA

 
Effects of BuIA on {beta}2-versus {beta}4-containing nAChRs—The rate of unblock by toxin was monitored subsequent to washout of ligand. The results are shown in Fig. 3. Recovery from toxin block was markedly slower for {beta}4 versus {beta}2 subunit-containing nAChRs. This effect is particularly noticeable when nAChRs containing the same {alpha} subunit are compared. We further investigated this effect on mouse {alpha}3{beta}2 versus mouse {alpha}3{beta}4 nAChRs, and human {alpha}3{beta}2 and human {alpha}3{beta}4 nAChRs. As was the case for rat nAChRs, the rate of recovery from toxin block was significantly slower for {beta}4-versus {beta}2-containing nAChRs (Fig. 4).



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 3.
Washout kinetics of {alpha}-BuIA on {beta}2- and {beta}4-containing nAChRs. {alpha}-BuIA was perfusion-applied to oocytes expressing the indicated rat nAChRs as described under "Experimental Procedures." After block was complete, toxin was washed out and response to ACh monitored. Note that nAChRs with the same {alpha} subunit but different {beta} subunit have very different recovery rates; in all cases, the respective {beta}4-containing receptor has the longest recovery.

 



View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 4.
Recovery from {alpha}-BuIA block in mouse and human nAChRs. {alpha}-BuIA was perfusion-applied to oocytes expressing the indicated mouse and human nAChRs. Recovery is prolonged for the {beta}4-containing nAChRs. m, mouse; h, human. Error bars are the S.E.

 
Although the off-rate for {beta}4-containing nAChRs was much slower, surprisingly in several instances the corresponding IC50 values of {alpha}-BuIA for {beta}2-containing nAChRs was lower than that of the {beta}4-containing receptors. Since affinity is a ratio of off-rate to on-rate, this implies that the on-rate for {beta}2-containing nAChRs is faster than that of the corresponding {beta}4-containing nAChRs. Time to steady state for toxin block of rat {alpha}3{beta}2 and {alpha}3{beta}4 nAChRs was examined by perfusing the toxin over the oocyte and then assessing a response to ACh (Fig. 5). The results are consistent with a markedly faster on-rate for the {beta}2-containing receptor. For {alpha}x{beta}2 nAChRs the recovery t1/2 was longest for {alpha}6/{alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs. The Ki of functional block of {alpha}6/{alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs, calculated from koff/kon (Fig. 6A) is consistent with the IC50 determined from concentration response analysis (0.69 nM versus 0.26 nM respectively). Kinetics of block and unblock were difficult to accurately quantitate for {alpha}x{beta}4 receptors due to the very long on- and off-times combined with limitations of oocyte life span and a tendency for the ACh response to drift over extended periods of time. However, kinetic constants for the {alpha}2{beta}4 nAChR were determined (Fig. 6B) and the calculated Ki of functional block by BuIA (62.9 nM) is consistent with the IC50 value (121 nM) determined by concentration response experiments. We further assessed kinetic constants for all {alpha}x{beta}4 nAChRs by determining kobs of block by three different toxin concentrations (Fig. 6C). The kon and koff for {alpha}2{beta}4 were 1.99 x 105 min-1 M-1 and 0.0125 min-1, respectively, and this compares well to the value determined from the toxin wash in and washout experiments (1.84 x 105 min-1 M-1 and 0.0106 min-1, Fig. 6B). The Ki values determined by this method were also consistent with IC50 values determined by concentration response analysis (Fig. 6C and Table II). However, whereas the on-rates determined by this method had reasonable 95% confidence intervals, the off-rates did not. The off-rate is determined by the y-intercept and for these toxins the y-intercept is near the origin (Fig. 6C). When the confidence interval includes the origin, the off-rate range becomes infinite. Therefore, as an additional check, we estimated off-rates by using the kon value determined by linear regression analysis of kobs values (Fig. 6C) and by assuming that the Ki is approximately equal to the IC50. koff values determined by this method were consistent with those obtained by the analysis of kobs values (Table II). For {alpha}2{beta}2, {alpha}3{beta}2, and {alpha}4{beta}2 nAChRs the toxin off-rate was rapid (t1/2 < 1 min, see Fig. 2); we therefore were unable to further quantitate koff for these receptor subtypes due to receptor desensitization that occurs from ACh exposure more frequent than once per minute.



View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 5.
Observed on-rate for {alpha}-BuIA. A, 10 nM {alpha}-BuIA was perfusion-applied to oocytes expressing rat {alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs as described under "Experimental Procedures." Time to equilibrium was examined by perfusing toxin over the oocyte at a toxin concentration 2–4x greater than the IC50, and then assessing response to a 1-s pulse of ACh every 1–2 min. B, 100 nM {alpha}-BuIA was perfusion-applied to Xenopus oocytes-expressing rat {alpha}3{beta}4 nAChRs. The time course was monitored as described in A. Data are from three oocytes. Error bars are the S.E.

 



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 6.
Kinetics of block and unblock by {alpha}-BuIA. A, {alpha}-BuIA at 0.3 nM was perfusion-applied (triangle) to oocytes expressing rat {alpha}6/{alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs and subsequently toxin was washed out (square). The response to a 1-s pulse of ACh every 1 min was assessed. An individual experiment is shown. Data averaged from 3 oocytes gave a kon of (2.77 ± 0.59) x 108 min-1 M-1. The koff was 0.168 ± 0.022 min-1. B, {alpha}-BuIA at 150 nM was perfusion applied to rat {alpha}2{beta}4 nAChRs and response to a 1-s pulse of ACh was monitored every 2 min. Results from a single experiment are shown (triangle). For three experiments the average kon = 1.84 x 105 min-1 M-1. {alpha}-BuIA was bath applied for 5 min at 1 µm and then washed out. Recovery from block was monitored by recording the response to a 1-s pulse of ACh every 2 min. A single experiment is shown (square). Results from three oocytes yielded a koff of 0.0106 ± 0.00212 min-1. C, toxin was perfusion applied to oocytes at three different concentrations for each nAChR subtype. The response to a 1-s pulse of ACh was monitored once per minute. Since kobs = kon x F + koff, where F = the free toxin concentration, the graph of kobs versus F has a slope of kon and a y-intercept of koff.

 


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE II
Kinetic analysis of {alpha}-BuIA on heterologously expressed rat nicotinic receptors

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
C. bullatus is found from Mozambique and Zanzibar to Marquesas and Hawaii. It lives in muddy sand, coral rubble and gravel, often beneath dead coral rocks outside and inside the reef. It is known to feed on fish and molluscs, and is preyed upon by skates and stingrays as well as mollusc-eating cone snails (15). In this report, we describe the first toxin to be isolated from this species. The toxin-encoding gene is homologous to peptides that are members of the A-superfamily of Conus toxins. This superfamily consists of peptides that act on nAChRs, potassium channels and sodium channels (14, 16, 17).

{alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA is a 13-amino acid peptide with homology to {alpha}-conotoxins isolated from other cone species. It is unusual however in the spacing between Cys residues. Previously isolated {alpha}-conotoxins fall into three broad categories. There are those that are referred to in the literature as having {alpha}3/5 spacing, indicating that there are three and five amino acids, respectively, between Cys residues in the two loops of the toxin; these are paralytic toxins isolated from Indo-Pacific cone snails that hunt fish, and potently inhibit the muscle nicotinic receptor. A second group is made up of those toxins having {alpha}4/7 spacing; these conotoxins predominately target neuronal subtypes of nicotinic receptors. The third group are the {alpha}4/3 peptides, isolated thus far only from Conus imperialis (18, 19) (Table III). {alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA has unusually broad specificity for different subtypes of neuronal nAChRs compared with previously characterized {alpha}-conotoxins. It is unknown whether the unique {alpha}4/4 spacing influences specificity.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE III
Selectivity of {alpha}-conotoxins

 
Total chemical synthesis of the new peptide was carried out assuming the disulfide bond configuration of previously characterized {alpha}-conotoxins. We note that native {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA has never been isolated from venom. Therefore, it is possible that there are post-translational modifications present in the native peptide that could influence the properties reported for the synthetic peptide described in this report.

{alpha}-Conotoxin BuIA distinguishes among {alpha}x{beta}2 nAChRs with a rank order potency of {alpha}6>{alpha}3>{alpha}2>{alpha}4 and there is a greater than 40,000-fold difference in IC50 between {alpha}6/{alpha}3{beta}2 and {alpha}4{beta}2 nAChRs. The {alpha}6 subunit appears to be important in both normal and pathophysiological conditions. {alpha}6 is expressed in catecholaminergic neurons and in retina (20, 21). {alpha}6{beta}2* nAChRs appear to be involved in the modulation of dopamine release (22) and are decreased in both primate 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine models as well as human Parkinson's disease (23, 24).

Another striking feature of {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA is its ability to discriminate, on the basis of off-rate kinetics, between {beta}2- and {beta}4-containing nAChRs. Off-rates are very slow for {beta}4-containing nAChRs, in contrast to the relatively rapid off-rates for {beta}2-containing receptors. The {beta}2 and {beta}4 subunits are found within both the central and peripheral nervous systems. Within the central nervous system, the transcripts for the {beta}2 subunit have widespread expression, whereas the {beta}4 subunit expression is more restricted. The areas within the brain where these two subunits are co-localized include the habenula-interpeduncular pathway, the locus ceruleus, and a few structures within the sensory and motor areas of the brainstem (25, 26). Within the peripheral nervous system, both {beta}2 and {beta}4 subunits are found in the autonomic ganglia (27, 28) and contribute to autonomic ganglionic neurotransmission (29–31). Knockout studies in mice suggest a more prominent role for the {beta}4 subunit in regulation of certain visceral functions, such as cardiac and intestinal autonomic regulation and bladder contractility (29, 31, 32). However, mice that lack either the {beta}4 or the {beta}2 subunit grow to adulthood with no visible phenotypical abnormalities, thus indicating a degree of redundancy between the {beta}2 and {beta}4 subunits (28, 29, 31, 32). Only the deletion of both the {beta}2 and {beta}4 subunits is lethal (29), and results in death soon after birth, therefore suggesting important contributions of both subunits to autonomic function. However, since few ligands can distinguish between the two subunits, it has been difficult to determine the exact contribution of each subunit to nAChRs that are present in autonomic ganglia in genetically normal animals.

{alpha}-BuIA represents a novel probe for discriminating, by differences in off-rate kinetic, between {beta}2- and {beta}4-containing receptors. We note that in certain instances, {beta}2 and {beta}4 subunits may form part of the same receptor complex (33). The kinetics of block by {alpha}-BuIA for such a receptor subtype are unknown. Heteromeric nAChRs have two ligand binding sites for acetylcholine formed between the interface of {alpha} and {beta} subunits. Two molecules of acetylcholine are generally believed to be required for receptor activation. If an {alpha}-conotoxin occupies one of the two acetylcholine binding sites, ACh is unable to activate the receptor. If {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA blocks by binding to the subunit interface, we feel it likely that the toxin would have slow off-rate kinetics for receptors containing a {beta}4 subunit at the ligand binding interface. The binding of other ligands is known to interact with nAChR {alpha} and {beta} subunits, and nAChR subunit chimeras have been used to localize the residues that contribute to subunit-dependent ligand selectivity (34). The agonist cytisine selectively activates rat {alpha}x{beta}4 versus {alpha}x{beta}2 nAChRs expressed in Xenopus oocytes (35). k-Bungarotoxin blocks rat {alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs with slow off-rate kinetics compared with {alpha}3{beta}4 nAChRs. Subunit residue number 59 (threonine in {beta}2 and lysine in {beta}4) appears to be the major determinant of k-bungarotoxin binding differences between these subunits (36). Cocaine, in addition to blocking the dopamine transporter, preferentially blocks {beta}4-containing versus {beta}2-containing nAChRs (37). Likewise, substance P, a small peptide that acts at neurokinin type 1 receptors, also noncompetitively blocks nAChRs with a 20- to 30-fold higher affinity for {beta}4-versus {beta}2 containing rat nAChRs (38). Species differences in nAChR subunits may have substantial effects on toxin binding. For example, dihydro-{beta}-erythroidine blocks rat {alpha}3{beta}2, {alpha}4{beta}2, and {alpha}4{beta}4 nAChRs expressed in Xenopus oocytes with nearly equal IC50 values (in µM, 0.41, 0.37, and 0.19, respectively) (39). In contrast, dihydro-{beta}-erythroidine blocks human {alpha}3{beta}2, {alpha}4{beta}2 and {alpha}4{beta}4 nAChRs expressed in Xenopus oocytes with ~10–100-fold differences in IC50 values (in µM, 1.62, 0.11, and 0.01, respectively) (40). For this reason, we examined the off-rate kinetics of block by {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA in three species. We demonstrate in this report that the ability of {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA to kinetically discriminate between {alpha}3{beta}4 and {alpha}3{beta}2 nAChRs is true for rat, mouse, and human subtypes as expressed in Xenopus oocytes. For each species, the t1/2 is less than 1 or 2 min for the {alpha}3{beta}2 subtype, and greater than 30 min for the {alpha}3{beta}4 subtype. Previously analyzed {alpha}-conotoxins have been shown to bind to determinants on both the {alpha} and {beta} subunits of the nAChR. Receptor mutation analysis indicates that {alpha}-conotoxin MII interacts with Lys185 and Ile188 of the {alpha}3 subunit, and Thr59 of the {beta}2 subunit (41). Analysis of {alpha}-conotoxin PnIA indicates that it interacts with overlapping but distinct residues on the {alpha}3 subunit, including Pro182, Ile188, and Gln198 (42). It should be possible using a similar approach to identify residues on the {beta}4 subunit that confer slow off-rate kinetics for {alpha}-conotoxin BuIA.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by Kirschstein-NRSA Postdoctoral Fellowship DA 016835 (to L. A.), and National Institutes of Health Grants MH 53631 (to J. M. M.), DA 14369 (to J. A. S.), and GM 48677 (to B. M. O.). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

** To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Biology, University of Utah, 257 South 1400 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112. Tel.: 801-585-3622; Fax: 801-585-5010; E-mail: mcintosh{at}biology.utah.edu.

1 The abbreviations used are: nAChR, nicotinic acetylcholine receptor; ACh, acetylcholine; HPLC, high performance liquid chromatography; Fmoc, N-(9-fluorenyl)methoxycarbonyl. Back



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Jones, S. W., Sudweeks, S., and Yakel, J. L. (1999) Trends Neurosci. 22, 555-561[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Role, L. W., and Berg, D. K. (1996) Neuron 16, 1077-1085[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Corringer, P. J., Le Novere, N., and Changeux, J.-P. (2000) Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 40, 431-458[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Jacobsen, R., Jimenez, E. C., Grilley, M., Watkins, M., Hillyard, D., Cruz, L. J., and Olivera, B. M. (1998) J. Peptide Res. 51, 173-179[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Jimenez, E. C., Craig, A. G., Watkins, M., Hillyard, D. R., Gray, W. R., Gulyas, J., Rivier, J. E., Cruz, L. J., and Olivera, B. M. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 989-994[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Walker, C., Steel, D., Jacobsen, R. B., Lirazan, M. B., Cruz, L. J., Hooper, D., Shetty, R., DelaCruz, R. C., Nielsen, J. S., Zhou, L., Bandyopadhyay, P., Craig, A., and Olivera, B. M. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 30664-30671[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Cartier, G. E., Yoshikami, D., Gray, W. R., Luo, S., Olivera, B. M., and McIntosh, J. M. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 7522-7528[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Gerzanich, V., Anand, R., and Lindstrom, J. (1994) Mol. Pharmacol. 45, 212-220[Abstract]
  9. Stitzel, J. A., Dobelis, P., Jimenez, M., and Collins, A. C. (2001) Pharmacogenetics 11, 331-339[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Johnson, D. S., Martinez, J., Elgoyhen, A. B., Heinemann, S. F., and McIntosh, J. M. (1995) Mol. Pharmacol. 48, 194-199[Abstract]
  11. Dowell, C., Olivera, B. M., Garrett, J. E., Staheli, S. T., Watkins, M., Kuryatov, A., Yoshikami, D., Lindstrom, J. M., and Mcintosh, J. M. (2003) J. Neurosci. 23, 8445-8452[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Parker, M. J., Beck, A., and Luetje, C. W. (1998) Mol. Pharmacol. 54, 1132-1139[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Schoenfeld, R. A. (1999) The Genomic Structure of Delta Conotoxins and Other O-Superfamily Conotoxins. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
  14. Santos, A. D., McIntosh, J. M., Hillyard, D. R., Cruz, L. J., and Olivera, B. M. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 17596-17606[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Röckel, D., Korn, W., and Kohn, A. J. (1995) Manual of the Living Conidae, I: Indo-Pacific Region, p. 214, Verlag Christa Hemmen, Wiesbaden, Germany
  16. McIntosh, J. M., Olivera, B. M., and Cruz, L. J. (1998) Methods Enzymol. 294, 605-624
  17. Wang, C. Z., Jiang, H., Ou, Z. L., Chen, J. S., and Chi, C. W. (2003) Toxicon 42, 613-619[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  18. McIntosh, J. M., Yoshikami, D., Mahe, E., Nielsen, D. B., Rivier, J. E., Gray, W. R., and Olivera, B. M. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 16733-16739[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Ellison, M., McIntosh, J. M., and Olivera, B. M. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 757-764[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Le Novère, N., Zoli, M., and Changeux, J. P. (1996) Eur. J. Neurosci. 8, 2428-2439[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Vailati, S., Hanke, W., Bejan, A., Barabino, B., Longhi, R., Balestra, B., Moretti, M., Clementi, F., and Gotti, C. (1999) Mol. Pharmacol. 56, 11-19[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Champtiaux, N., Han, Z.-Y., Bessis, A., Rossi, F. M., Zoli, M., Marubio, L., McIntosh, J. M., and Changeux, J.-P. (2002) J. Neurosci. 22, 1208-1217[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Quik, M., Polonskaya, Y., Kulak, J. N., and McIntosh, J. M. (2001) J. Neurosci. 21, 5494-5500[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Quik, M., Bordia, T., Forno, L., and McIntosh, J. M. (2004) J. Neurochem. 88, 668-679[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Winzer-Serhan, U. H., and Leslie, F. M. (1997) J. Comp. Neurol. 386, 540-554[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  26. Wada, E., Wada, K., Boulter, J., Deneris, E. S., Heinemann, S., Patrick, J., and Swanson, L. W. (1989) J. Comp. Neurol. 284, 314-335[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Rust, G., Burgunder, J. M., Lauterburg, T. E., and Cachelin, A. B. (1994) Eur. J. Neurosci. 6, 478-485[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. De Biasi, M. (2002) J. Neurobiol. 53, 568-579[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Xu, W., Orr-Urtreger, A., Nigro, F., Gelber, S., Sutcliffe, C. B., Armstrong, D., Patrick, J. W., Role, L. W., Beaudet, A. L., and De Biasi, M. (1999) J. Neurosci. 19, 9298-9305[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Bibevski, S., Zhou, Y., McIntosh, J. M., Zigmond, R. E., and Dunlap, M. E. (2000) J. Neurosci. 20, 5076-5082[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Wang, N., Orr-Urtreger, A., and Korczyn, A. D. (2002) Prog. Neurobiol. 68, 341-360[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Wang, N., Orr-Urtreger, A., Chapman, J., Rabinowitz, R., and Korczyn, A. D. (2003) Mol. Pharmacol. 63, 574-580[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Colquhoun, L. M., and Patrick, J. W. (1997) J. Neurochem. 69, 2355-2362[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Figl, A., Cohen, B. N., Quick, M. W., Davidson, N., and Lester, H. A. (1992) FEBS Lett. 308, 245-248[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Luetje, C. W., and Patrick, J. (1991) J. Neurosci. 11, 837-845[Abstract]
  36. Harvey, S. C., and Luetje, C. W. (1996) J. Neurosci. 16, 3798-3806[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Francis, M. M., Vazquez, R. W., Papke, R. L., and Oswald, R. E. (2000) Mol. Pharmacol. 58, 109-119[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Stafford, G. A., Oswald, R. E., and Weiland, G. A. (1994) Mol. Pharmacol. 45, 758-762[Abstract]
  39. Harvey, S. C., Maddox, F. N., and Luetje, C. W. (1996) J. Neurochem. 67, 1953-1959[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Chavez-Noriega, L. E., Crona, J. H., Washburn, M. S., Urrutia, A., Elliott, K. J., and Johnson, E. C. (1997) J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 280, 346-356[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Harvey, S. C., McIntosh, J. M., Cartier, G. E., Maddox, F. N., and Luetje, C. W. (1997) Mol. Pharmacol. 51, 336-342[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Everhart, D., Reiller, E., Mirzoian, A., McIntosh, J. M., Malhotra, A., and Luetje, C. W. (2003) J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 306, 665-670
  43. Kreienkamp, H. J., Sine, S. M., Maeda, R. K., and Taylor, P. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 8108-8114[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Martinez, J. S., Olivera, B. M., Gray, W. R., Craig, A. G., Groebe, D. R., Abramson, S. N., and McIntosh, J. M. (1995) Biochemistry 34, 14519-14526[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  45. Hann, R. M., Pagán, O. R., and Eterovic, V. A. (1994) Biochemistry 33, 14058-14063[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  46. Groebe, D. R., Dumm, J. M., Levitan, E. S., and Abramson, S. N. (1995) Mol. Pharmacol. 48, 105-111[Abstract]
  47. Hann, R. M., Pagán, O. R., Gregory, L. M., Jácome, T., and Eterovic, V. A. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 9051-9056[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  48. Luo, S., Nguyen, T. A., Cartier, G. E., Olivera, B. M., Yoshikami, D., and McIntosh, J. M. (1999) Biochemistry 38, 14542-14548[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  49. McIntosh, J. M., Dowell, C., Watkins, M., Garrett, J. E., Yoshikami, D., and Olivera, B. M. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 33610-33615[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Loughnan, M., Bond, T., Atkins, A., Cuevas, J., Adams, D. J., Broxton, N. M., Livett, B. G., Down, J. G., Jones, A., Alewood, P. F., and Lewis, R. J. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 15667-15674[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  51. Nicke, A., Loughnan, M. L., Millard, E. L., Alewood, P. F., Adams, D. J., Daly, N. L., Craik, D. J., and Lewis, R. J. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 3137-3144[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
M. Vincler, S. Wittenauer, R. Parker, M. Ellison, B. M. Olivera, and J. M. McIntosh
Molecular mechanism for analgesia involving specific antagonism of {alpha}9{alpha}10 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors
PNAS, November 21, 2006; 103(47): 17880 - 17884.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Pharmacol.Home page
L. Azam and J. M. McIntosh
Characterization of Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors That Modulate Nicotine-Evoked [3H]Norepinephrine Release from Mouse Hippocampal Synaptosomes
Mol. Pharmacol., September 1, 2006; 70(3): 967 - 976.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Pharmacol.Home page
K. B. Mihalak, F. I. Carroll, and C. W. Luetje
Varenicline Is a Partial Agonist at {alpha}4beta2 and a Full Agonist at {alpha}7 Neuronal Nicotinic Receptors
Mol. Pharmacol., September 1, 2006; 70(3): 801 - 805.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]