2007
DOI: 10.1021/bi062213s
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

GluR3 Flip and Flop:  Differences in Channel Opening Kinetics

Abstract: Ample evidence from earlier studies of alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptors, GluR3 included, suggests that alternative splicing not only enriches AMPA receptor diversity but also, more importantly, creates receptor variants that are functionally different. However, it is not known whether alternative splicing affects the receptor channel opening that occurs in the microsecond time domain. Using a laser-pulse photolysis technique combined with whole-cell recording, we charac… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

16
73
1
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(91 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
(116 reference statements)
16
73
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, this hypothesis is consistent with previous observations that desensitization is agonist-promoted (32) and that the L497Y mutant channels can desensitize, albeit very slowly and only at very high concentrations of ligand, as observed by us and others (6,9). Moreover, that the rate of the channel closing controls the rate of desensitization is supported by our results with the GluR3 receptors in that the k cl of the GluR3 flop variant is ϳ4-fold larger than that of the flip isoform, and the flop isoform desensitizes ϳ4-fold faster than the flip isoform (29). On the other hand, for the flip and flop isoforms of GluR1, the k cl of both isoforms is identical, within experimental errors, and as expected, the channel desensitization rate constant is also no different.…”
Section: Implications Based On the Kinetic Constants And Free Energysupporting
confidence: 87%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Indeed, this hypothesis is consistent with previous observations that desensitization is agonist-promoted (32) and that the L497Y mutant channels can desensitize, albeit very slowly and only at very high concentrations of ligand, as observed by us and others (6,9). Moreover, that the rate of the channel closing controls the rate of desensitization is supported by our results with the GluR3 receptors in that the k cl of the GluR3 flop variant is ϳ4-fold larger than that of the flip isoform, and the flop isoform desensitizes ϳ4-fold faster than the flip isoform (29). On the other hand, for the flip and flop isoforms of GluR1, the k cl of both isoforms is identical, within experimental errors, and as expected, the channel desensitization rate constant is also no different.…”
Section: Implications Based On the Kinetic Constants And Free Energysupporting
confidence: 87%
“…For instance, the k cl of the L497Y mutant is smaller than that of the wild type, suggesting that this structural modification lowers the energy level of the open channel state by stabilizing it. In contrast, our study of the alternatively spliced variants of GluR3 or GluR3 flip and GluR3 flop shows that the flop isoform has a larger k cl than the flip isoform, presumably reflecting that the flop isoform destabilizes the channel-open state (29). By the same prediction, any mutation or change of structure (whether it is located in the dimer interface, such as the mutation in GluR2, but is equivalent to the L497Y in GluR1 (6), or elsewhere but nevertheless stabilizes the open channel state) would slow the rate of channel closing.…”
Section: Implications Based On the Kinetic Constants And Free Energycontrasting
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…AMPAR flip subunitcontaining receptors are more efficiently activated by glutamate and they desensitize with slower kinetics (Mosbacher et al, 1994;Sommer et al, 1990). GluA3(Q)-flip receptors, for example, recover more quickly from desensitization and display 4-fold longer channel open times than GluA3(Q)-flop (Pei et al, 2007;Pei et al, 2009).…”
Section: The Importance Of Flip and (Q) Variantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2D) cannot be explained by passive cable properties associated with possible lack of space clamp and require an alternative explanation. While one possibility is postsynaptic receptor diversity (Bonsacquet et al 2006;Harms et al 2014;Mayer 2011;Pei et al 2007), another is that transmitter accumulation in the confined calyceal cleft prolongs EPSCs arising at specific synaptic sites (see Fig. 4 and discussion below) (Sadeghi et al 2014).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%