Background: ␣-Synuclein is known to undergo exchange between membrane and cytosolic compartments. Results: ␣-Synuclein interacts with GTP-bound Rab3a on synaptic vesicles, and its dissociation is mediated by GDI/Hsp90. Conclusion: ␣-Synuclein's membrane association and dissociation cycle is linked to synaptic activity by the Rab3a recycling machinery. Significance: Significance: Impairments to ␣-synuclein interactions with vesicles and with the Rab3a recycling machinery may affect neurodegeneration.

Evidence that synaptic vesicles (SVs) can be gated by a single voltage sensitive calcium channel (CaV2.2) predict a molecular linking mechanism or “tether” (Stanley, 1993). Recent studies have proposed that the SV binds to the distal C-terminal on the CaV2.2 calcium channel (Kaeser et al., 2011; Wong et al., 2013) while genetic analysis proposed a double tether mechanism via RIM: directly to the C terminus PDZ ligand domain or indirectly via a more proximal proline rich site (Kaeser et al., 2011). Using a novel in vitro SV pull down binding assay, we reported that SVs bind to a fusion protein comprising the C-terminal distal third (C3, aa 2137–2357; Wong et al., 2013). Here we limit the binding site further to the last 58 aa, beyond the proline rich site, by the absence of SV capture by a truncated C3 fusion protein (aa 2137–2299). To test PDZ-dependent binding we generated two C terminus-mutant C3 fusion proteins and a mimetic blocking peptide (H-WC, aa 2349–2357) and validated these by elimination of MINT-1 or RIM binding. Persistence of SV capture with all three fusion proteins or with the full length C3 protein but in the presence of blocking peptide, demonstrated that SVs can bind to the distal C-terminal via a PDZ-independent mechanism. These results were supported in situ by normal SV turnover in H-WC-loaded synaptosomes, as assayed by a novel peptide cryoloading method. Thus, SVs tether to the CaV2.2 C-terminal within a 49 aa region immediately prior to the terminus PDZ ligand domain. Long tethers that could reflect extended C termini were imaged by electron microscopy of synaptosome ghosts. To fully account for SV tethering we propose a model where SVs are initially captured, or “grabbed,” from the cytoplasm by a binding site on the distal region of the channel C-terminal and are then retracted to be “locked” close to the channel by a second attachment mechanism in preparation for single channel domain gating.

Neurons communicate with their target cells primarily by the release of chemical transmitters from presynaptic nerve terminals. The study of CNS presynaptic nerve terminals, isolated as synaptosomes (SSMs) has, however, been hampered by the typical small size of these structures that precludes the introduction of non-membrane permeable test substances such as peptides and drugs. We have developed a method to introduce large alien compounds of at least 150 kDa into functional synaptosomes. Purified synaptosomes are frozen in cryo-preserving buffer containing the alien compound. Upon defrosting, many of the SSMs contain the alien compound presumably admitted by bulk buffer-transfer through the surface membranes that crack and reseal during the freeze/thaw cycle. ~80% of the cryoloaded synaptosomes were functional and recycled synaptic vesicles (SVs), as assessed by a standard styryl dye uptake assay. Access of the cryoloaded compound into the cytoplasm and biological activity were confirmed by block of depolarization-induced SV recycling with membrane-impermeant BAPTA (a rapid Ca2+-scavenger), or botulinum A light chain (which cleaves the soluble NSF attachment protein receptor (SNARE) protein SNAP25). A major advantage of the method is that loaded frozen synaptosomes can be stored virtually indefinitely for later experimentation. We also demonstrate that individual synaptosome types can be identified by immunostaining of receptors associated with its scab of attached postsynaptic membrane. Thus, cryoloading and scab-staining permits the examination of SV recycling in identified individual CNS presynaptic nerve terminals.

At chemical synapses the incoming action potential triggers the influx of Ca2+ through voltage-sensitive calcium channels (CaVs, typically CaV2.1 and 2.2) and the ions binds to sensors associated with docked, transmitter filled synaptic vesicles (SVs), triggering their fusion and discharge. The CaVs and docked SVs are located within the active zone (AZ) region of the synapse which faces a corresponding neurotransmitter receptor-rich region on the post-synaptic cell. Evidence that the fusion of a SV can be gated by Ca2+ influx through a single CaV suggests that the channel and docked vesicle are linked by one or more molecular tethers (Stanley, 1993). Short and long fibrous SV-AZ linkers have been identified in presynaptic terminals by electron microscopy and we recently imaged these in cytosol-vacated synaptosome ‘ghosts.’ Using CaV fusion proteins combined with blocking peptides we previously identified a SV binding site near the tip of the CaV2.2 C-terminal suggesting that this intracellular channel domain participates in SV tethering. In this study, we combined the synaptosome ghost imaging method with immunogold labeling to localize CaV intracellular domains. L45, raised against the C-terminal tip, tagged tethered SVs often as far as 100 nm from the AZ membrane whereas NmidC2, raised against a C-terminal mid-region peptide, and C2Nt, raised against a peptide nearer the C-terminal origin, resulted in gold particles that were proportionally closer to the AZ. Interestingly, the observation of gold-tagged SVs with NmidC2 suggests a novel SV binding site in the C-terminal mid region. Our results implicate the CaV C-terminal in SV tethering at the AZ with two possible functions: first, capturing SVs from the nearby cytoplasm and second, contributing to the localization of the SV close to the channel to permit single domain gating.

Neurotransmitter is released from presynaptic nerve terminals at fast-transmitting synapses by the action potential-gating of voltage dependent calcium channels (CaV), primarily of the CaV2.1 and CaV2.2 types. Entering Ca2+ diffuses to a nearby calcium sensor associated with a docked synaptic vesicle (SV) and initiates its fusion and discharge. Our previous findings that single CaVs can gate SV fusion argued for one or more tethers linking CaVs to docked SVs but the molecular nature of these tethers have not been established. We recently developed a cell-free, in vitro biochemical assay, termed SV pull-down (SV-PD), to test for SV binding proteins and used this to demonstrate that CaV2.2 or the distal third of its C-terminal can capture SVs. In subsequent reports we identified the binding site and characterized an SV binding motif. In this study, we set out to test if a similar SV-binding mechanism exists in the primary presynaptic channel type, CaV2.1. We cloned the chick variant of this channel and to our surprise found that it lacked the terminal third of the C-terminal, ruling out direct correlation with CaV2.2. We used SV-PD to identify an SV binding site in the distal half of the CaV2.1 C-terminal, a region that corresponds to the central third of the CaV2.2 C-terminal. Mutant fusion proteins combined with motif-blocking peptide strategies identified two domains that could account for SV binding; one in an alternatively spliced region (E44) and a second more distal site. Our findings provide a molecular basis for CaV2.1 SV binding that can account for recent evidence of C-terminal-dependent transmitter release modulation and that may contribute to SV tethering within the CaV2.1 single channel Ca2+ domain.

Background In prior research, we identified and prioritized ten measures to assess research performance that comply with the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, a principle adopted worldwide that discourages metrics-based assessment. Given the shift away from assessment based on Journal Impact Factor, we explored potential barriers to implementing and adopting the prioritized measures. Methods We identified administrators and researchers across six research institutes, conducted telephone interviews with consenting participants, and used qualitative description and inductive content analysis to derive themes. Results We interviewed 18 participants: 6 administrators (research institute business managers and directors) and 12 researchers (7 on appointment committees) who varied by career stage (2 early, 5 mid, 5 late). Participants appreciated that the measures were similar to those currently in use, comprehensive, relevant across disciplines, and generated using a rigorous process. They also said the reporting template was easy to understand and use. In contrast, a few administrators thought the measures were not relevant across disciplines. A few participants said it would be time-consuming and difficult to prepare narratives when reporting the measures, and several thought that it would be difficult to objectively evaluate researchers from a different discipline without considerable effort to read their work. Strategies viewed as necessary to overcome barriers and support implementation of the measures included high-level endorsement of the measures, an official launch accompanied by a multi-pronged communication strategy, training for both researchers and evaluators, administrative support or automated reporting for researchers, guidance for evaluators, and sharing of approaches across research institutes. Conclusions While participants identified many strengths of the measures, they also identified a few limitations and offered corresponding strategies to address the barriers that we will apply at our organization. Ongoing work is needed to develop a framework to help evaluators translate the measures into an overall assessment. Given little prior research that identified research assessment measures and strategies to support adoption of those measures, this research may be of interest to other organizations that assess the quality and impact of research.

No abstract