| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Journal of Physiology (2002), 545.2, p. 334
© Copyright 2002 The Physiological Society
DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2002.033001
Email: swj{at}po.cwru.edu
The textbook view is that a calcium channel contains four subunits: 
1, 2-
, 
and 
. This was initially based on biochemical purification of the L-type channel from skeletal muscle, as all four subunits remained associated during the harsh conditions needed for protein purification. The core of the channel is the 1 subunit, which contains the voltage sensors, ion pore, and binding sites for drugs such as dihydropyridines. So what are the roles of the other subunits?
In Xenopus oocytes, the 1 subunit alone produces a low level of channel activity, but Tarelius et al. (1997) found that antisense oligonucleotides against subunits prevented functional expression of 1. Furthermore, coexpression of 1 with additional both increased current amplitudes and modified channel gating. Thus, subunits must have two separable effects: they not only facilitate initial channel expression, but also modify the kinetics of existing channels (Tareilus et al. 1997).
How can subunits have two distinct actions? Figure 1 shows two possibilities. Perhaps there is only one binding site, and interacts with 1 at two distinct stages of the calcium channel lifecycle (1-site model). Reversible binding of to 1 facilitates expression of 1 in the plasma membrane, perhaps by masking an endoplasmic reticulum retention signal (Bichet et al. 2000). While in the plasma membrane, 1 can reversibly associate with , changing a minimally functional 1-only channel to a mature channel. These 1- interactions are sequential, and thus could involve a single binding site. In the alternative view (2-site model), stoichiometric assembly of the 1- complex is necessary for expression of 1 in the cell membrane, while occupancy of a second (low affinity?) site modulates channel kinetics. Both models seem consistent with existing data, although there is evidence for a second binding site (Birnbaumer et al. 1998; Gerster et al. 1999).
 |
View larger version [in this window] [in a new window] |
|
|
Figure 1. Two models for interactions of calcium channel ER, endoplasmic (or sarcoplasmic) reticulum; PM, plasma membrane. | ||
Put bluntly, are subunits really stoichiometric subunits of the Ca2+ channel, or are they just modulatory proteins that can be associated with Ca2+ channels under some circumstances (like G protein subunits, syntaxin, ryanodine receptors, etc.)? In the 1-site model, the subunit appears as a modulatory protein, with two distinct effects at different stages. In the 2-site model, is both a true subunit and a modulatory protein (at distinct binding sites).
One key question is how modulates preexisting 1 subunits in the plasma membrane. How rapid is that action? Is it reversible? Are 1 subunits normally saturated with ? These questions have been difficult to address, in part because most studies have examined effects of on 1 by coexpression, which does not allow direct determination of whether the interaction is dynamic. Previous evidence for reversible association of with 1 has mostly been indirect (Canti et al. 2001; Restituito et al. 2001), although injection of purified subunits into Xenopus oocytes can modulate calcium currents within 1 h (Yamaguchi et al. 1998). Furthermore, a peptide corresponding to the -binding site in the I-II loop of the 1 subunit can can modify single channel gating (Hohaus et al. 2000), possibly by causing to dissociate from 1.
In a paper in this issue of The Journal of Physiology García et al. (2002) now show that acute application of purified subunits affects currents through calcium channels, using whole cell dialysis of membrane vesicles from adult skeletal muscle. Over ~20 min (the expected time for delivery of a ~60 kDa protein from a patch pipette), the current doubled in amplitude. There was no obvious effect on activation kinetics, but a ~16 mV shift of inactivation towards more negative voltages and an increased slow tail current were seen. Three lines of evidence suggest that the subunits were modulating preexisting 1 subunits, rather than enhancing membrane expression of 1: (1) the time course was too fast for expression of new 1 subunits; (2) the vesicles appeared to have no sarcoplasmic reticulum or other organelles; and (3) the gating currents did not increase, implying no change in the number of 1 proteins that could move their voltage sensors. One implication of this study is that 1 subunits are not normally fully saturated with .
It seems that subunits act (at least in part) by rapidly reversibly binding, in stark contrast to the traditional picture of an invariant stoichiometric subunit. Could this also be true for the other calcium channel 'subunits', notably the enigmatic ?
| BICHET, D., CORNET, V., GEIB, S., CARLIER, E., VOLSEN, S., HOSHI, T., MORI, Y. & DE WAARD, M. (2000). Neuron 25, 177-190. | [Medline] |
| BIRNBAUMER, L., QIN, N., OLCESE, R., TAREILUS, E., PLATANO, D., COSTANTIN, J. & STEFANI, E. (1998). Journal of Bioenergetics and Biomembranes 30, 357-375. | [Medline] |
| CANTI, C., DAVIES, A., BERROW, N. S., BUTCHER, A. J., PAGE, K. M. & DOLPHIN, A. C. (2001). Biophysical Journal 81, 1439-1451. | [Abstract/Full Text] |
| GARCIA, R., CARRILLO, E., REBOLLEDO, S., GARCIA, M. C. & SANCHEZ, J. A. (2002). Journal of Physiology 545, 407-419. | |
| GERSTER, U., NEUHUBER, B., GROSCHNER, K., STRIESSNIG, J. & FLUCHER, B. E. (1999). Journal of Physiology 517, 353-368. | [Abstract/Full Text] |
| HOHAUS, A., POTESER, M., ROMANIN, C., KLUGBAUER, N., HOFMANN, F., MORANO, I., HAASE, H. & GROSCHNER, K. (2000). Biochemical Journal 348, 657-665. | [Medline] |
| RESTITUITO, S., CENS, T., ROUSSET, M. & CHARNET, P. (2001). Biophysical Journal 81, 89-96. | [Medline] |
| TAREILUS, E., ROUX, M., QIN, N., OLCESE, R., ZHOU, J., STEFANI, E. & BIRNBAUMER, L. (1997). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 94, 1703-1708. | [Abstract/Full Text] |
| YAMAGUCHI, H., HARA, M., STROBECK, M., FUKASAWA, K., SCHWARTZ, A. & VARADI, G. (1998). Journal of Biological Chemistry 273, 19348-19356. | [Abstract/Full Text] |
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  N. Kanevsky and N. Dascal Regulation of Maximal Open Probability Is a Separable Function of Cav{beta} Subunit in L-type Ca2+ Channel, Dependent on NH2 Terminus of {alpha}1C (Cav1.2{alpha}) J. Gen. Physiol., June 26, 2006; 128(1): 15 - 36. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. C. Garcia, E. Carrillo, J. M. Galindo, A. Hernandez, J. A. Copello, M. Fill, and J. A. Sanchez Short-Term Regulation of Excitation-Contraction Coupling by the {beta}1a Subunit in Adult Mouse Skeletal Muscle Biophys. J., December 1, 2005; 89(6): 3976 - 3984. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Dalton, S. X Takahashi, J. Miriyala, and H. M Colecraft A single CaV{beta} can reconstitute both trafficking and macroscopic conductance of voltage-dependent calcium channels J. Physiol., September 15, 2005; 567(3): 757 - 769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Neely, J. Garcia-Olivares, S. Voswinkel, H. Horstkott, and P. Hidalgo Folding of Active Calcium Channel {beta}1b -Subunit by Size-exclusion Chromatography and Its Role on Channel Function J. Biol. Chem., May 21, 2004; 279(21): 21689 - 21694. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Hummer, O. Delzeith, S. R. Gomez, R. L. Moreno, M. D. Mark, and S. Herlitze Competitive and Synergistic Interactions of G Protein {beta}2 and Ca2+ Channel {beta}1b Subunits with Cav2.1 Channels, Revealed by Mammalian Two-hybrid and Fluorescence Resonance Energy Transfer Measurements J. Biol. Chem., December 5, 2003; 278(49): 49386 - 49400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
