Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Journal of Physiology logoLink to The Journal of Physiology
. 1996 Jul 1;494(Pt 1):155–170. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1996.sp021482

Voltage dependence of mouse acetylcholine receptor gating: different charge movements in di-, mono- and unliganded receptors.

A Auerbach 1, W Sigurdson 1, J Chen 1, G Akk 1
PMCID: PMC1160621  PMID: 8814613

Abstract

1. The voltage dependence of binding and gating in wild-type and mutant recombinant mouse nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (AChRs) was examined at the single-channel level. 2. The closing rate constant of diliganded receptors decreased e-fold with approximately 66 mV hyperpolarization in both wild-type (adult and embryonic) and mutant receptors. The opening rate constant of a mutant receptor (alpha Y93F) was not voltage dependent. 3. The voltage dependence of closing in monoliganded receptors was examined in several receptors having a mutation in the binding site (alpha G153S) or pore region (alpha L251C and epsilon T264P). The closing rate constant of these monoliganded receptors decreased e-fold with approximately 124 mV hyperpolarization. 4. The voltage dependence of closing and opening in unliganded receptors was examined in two receptors having a mutation in the pore region (alpha L251C and epsilon T264P). Neither the closing nor the opening rate constants of unliganded receptors were voltage dependent. 5. If z if the amount of charge that moves during channel closure and delta is the distance (as a fraction of the electric field) that the charge moves, we conclude that z delta = 0.4 in diliganded receptors, 0.2 in monoliganded receptors, and 0.0 in unliganded receptors. It is likely that charges on the protein, rather than the agonist molecule, move z delta = 0.2 after each ACh molecule has bound. 6. The results suggest that unliganded openings arise from a local, concerted change in the structure of the pore (channel opening) that does not involve the net movement of charged residues. We speculate that as a consequence of agonist binding, charged moieties in the protein change their disposition so that they move with respect to the electric field when the channel gates. The results are consistent with the idea that there is semi-independent movement of distinct domains during AChR gating.

Full text

PDF
155

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Ackers G. K., Doyle M. L., Myers D., Daugherty M. A. Molecular code for cooperativity in hemoglobin. Science. 1992 Jan 3;255(5040):54–63. doi: 10.1126/science.1553532. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Akabas M. H., Stauffer D. A., Xu M., Karlin A. Acetylcholine receptor channel structure probed in cysteine-substitution mutants. Science. 1992 Oct 9;258(5080):307–310. doi: 10.1126/science.1384130. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Akk G., Auerbach A. Inorganic, monovalent cations compete with agonists for the transmitter binding site of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Biophys J. 1996 Jun;70(6):2652–2658. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(96)79834-X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Auerbach A. A statistical analysis of acetylcholine receptor activation in Xenopus myocytes: stepwise versus concerted models of gating. J Physiol. 1993 Feb;461:339–378. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1993.sp019517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Changeux J. P., Edelstein S. J. On allosteric mechanisms and acetylcholine receptors. Trends Biochem Sci. 1994 Oct;19(10):399–400. doi: 10.1016/0968-0004(94)90084-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen J., Zhang Y., Akk G., Sine S., Auerbach A. Activation kinetics of recombinant mouse nicotinic acetylcholine receptors: mutations of alpha-subunit tyrosine 190 affect both binding and gating. Biophys J. 1995 Sep;69(3):849–859. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(95)79959-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Colquhoun D., Dreyer F., Sheridan R. E. The actions of tubocurarine at the frog neuromuscular junction. J Physiol. 1979 Aug;293:247–284. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1979.sp012888. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Colquhoun D., Hawkes A. G. Relaxation and fluctuations of membrane currents that flow through drug-operated channels. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1977 Nov 14;199(1135):231–262. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1977.0137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Colquhoun D., Sakmann B. Fast events in single-channel currents activated by acetylcholine and its analogues at the frog muscle end-plate. J Physiol. 1985 Dec;369:501–557. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1985.sp015912. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Imoto K., Methfessel C., Sakmann B., Mishina M., Mori Y., Konno T., Fukuda K., Kurasaki M., Bujo H., Fujita Y. Location of a delta-subunit region determining ion transport through the acetylcholine receptor channel. Nature. 1986 Dec 18;324(6098):670–674. doi: 10.1038/324670a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jackson M. B. Dependence of acetylcholine receptor channel kinetics on agonist concentration in cultured mouse muscle fibres. J Physiol. 1988 Mar;397:555–583. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1988.sp017019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Jackson M. B. Kinetics of unliganded acetylcholine receptor channel gating. Biophys J. 1986 Mar;49(3):663–672. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(86)83693-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jackson M. B. Perfection of a synaptic receptor: kinetics and energetics of the acetylcholine receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 Apr;86(7):2199–2203. doi: 10.1073/pnas.86.7.2199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Karlin A. On the application of "a plausible model" of allosteric proteins to the receptor for acetylcholine. J Theor Biol. 1967 Aug;16(2):306–320. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(67)90011-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Koshland D. E., Jr, Némethy G., Filmer D. Comparison of experimental binding data and theoretical models in proteins containing subunits. Biochemistry. 1966 Jan;5(1):365–385. doi: 10.1021/bi00865a047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Labarca C., Nowak M. W., Zhang H., Tang L., Deshpande P., Lester H. A. Channel gating governed symmetrically by conserved leucine residues in the M2 domain of nicotinic receptors. Nature. 1995 Aug 10;376(6540):514–516. doi: 10.1038/376514a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. MONOD J., WYMAN J., CHANGEUX J. P. ON THE NATURE OF ALLOSTERIC TRANSITIONS: A PLAUSIBLE MODEL. J Mol Biol. 1965 May;12:88–118. doi: 10.1016/s0022-2836(65)80285-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Maconochie D. J., Fletcher G. H., Steinbach J. H. The conductance of the muscle nicotinic receptor channel changes rapidly upon gating. Biophys J. 1995 Feb;68(2):483–490. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(95)80209-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Magleby K. L., Stevens C. F. A quantitative description of end-plate currents. J Physiol. 1972 May;223(1):173–197. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1972.sp009840. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Magleby K. L., Stevens C. F. The effect of voltage on the time course of end-plate currents. J Physiol. 1972 May;223(1):151–171. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1972.sp009839. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Neher E., Sakmann B. Single-channel currents recorded from membrane of denervated frog muscle fibres. Nature. 1976 Apr 29;260(5554):799–802. doi: 10.1038/260799a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ohno K., Hutchinson D. O., Milone M., Brengman J. M., Bouzat C., Sine S. M., Engel A. G. Congenital myasthenic syndrome caused by prolonged acetylcholine receptor channel openings due to a mutation in the M2 domain of the epsilon subunit. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Jan 31;92(3):758–762. doi: 10.1073/pnas.92.3.758. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Revah F., Bertrand D., Galzi J. L., Devillers-Thiéry A., Mulle C., Hussy N., Bertrand S., Ballivet M., Changeux J. P. Mutations in the channel domain alter desensitization of a neuronal nicotinic receptor. Nature. 1991 Oct 31;353(6347):846–849. doi: 10.1038/353846a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rohrbough J., Kidokoro Y. Changes in kinetics of acetylcholine receptor channels after initial expression in Xenopus myocyte culture. J Physiol. 1990 Jun;425:245–269. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1990.sp018101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Sheridan R. E., Lester H. A. Rates and equilibria at the acetylcholine receptor of Electrophorus electroplaques: a study of neurally evoked postsynaptic currents and of voltage-jump relaxations. J Gen Physiol. 1977 Aug;70(2):187–219. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Sigworth F. J., Sine S. M. Data transformations for improved display and fitting of single-channel dwell time histograms. Biophys J. 1987 Dec;52(6):1047–1054. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(87)83298-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Sine S. M., Claudio T., Sigworth F. J. Activation of Torpedo acetylcholine receptors expressed in mouse fibroblasts. Single channel current kinetics reveal distinct agonist binding affinities. J Gen Physiol. 1990 Aug;96(2):395–437. doi: 10.1085/jgp.96.2.395. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Sine S. M. Molecular dissection of subunit interfaces in the acetylcholine receptor: identification of residues that determine curare selectivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Oct 15;90(20):9436–9440. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.20.9436. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Sine S. M., Ohno K., Bouzat C., Auerbach A., Milone M., Pruitt J. N., Engel A. G. Mutation of the acetylcholine receptor alpha subunit causes a slow-channel myasthenic syndrome by enhancing agonist binding affinity. Neuron. 1995 Jul;15(1):229–239. doi: 10.1016/0896-6273(95)90080-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Sine S. M., Quiram P., Papanikolaou F., Kreienkamp H. J., Taylor P. Conserved tyrosines in the alpha subunit of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor stabilize quaternary ammonium groups of agonists and curariform antagonists. J Biol Chem. 1994 Mar 25;269(12):8808–8816. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Unwin N. Acetylcholine receptor channel imaged in the open state. Nature. 1995 Jan 5;373(6509):37–43. doi: 10.1038/373037a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Unwin N. Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor at 9 A resolution. J Mol Biol. 1993 Feb 20;229(4):1101–1124. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1993.1107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Valenzuela C. F., Weign P., Yguerabide J., Johnson D. A. Transverse distance between the membrane and the agonist binding sites on the Torpedo acetylcholine receptor: a fluorescence study. Biophys J. 1994 Mar;66(3 Pt 1):674–682. doi: 10.1016/s0006-3495(94)80841-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhang Y., Chen J., Auerbach A. Activation of recombinant mouse acetylcholine receptors by acetylcholine, carbamylcholine and tetramethylammonium. J Physiol. 1995 Jul 1;486(Pt 1):189–206. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1995.sp020802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of Physiology are provided here courtesy of The Physiological Society

RESOURCES