Abstract
Mutations in rhodopsin cause retinitis pigmentosa in humans and retinal degeneration in a multitude of other animals. We utilized high-resolution live imaging of the large rod photoreceptors from transgenic frogs (Xenopus) to compare the properties of fluorescently tagged rhodopsin, Rho-EGFP, and RhoP23H-EGFP. The mutant was abnormally distributed both in the inner and outer segments (OS), accumulating in the OS to a concentration of ∼0.1% compared to endogenous opsin. RhoP23H-EGFP formed dense fluorescent foci, with concentrations of mutant protein up to ten times higher than other regions. Wild-type transgenic Rho-EGFP did not concentrate in OS foci when co-expressed in the same rod with RhoP23H-EGFP. Outer segment regions containing fluorescent foci were refractory to fluorescence recovery after photobleaching, while foci in the inner segment exhibited recovery kinetics similar to OS regions without foci and Rho-EGFP. The RhoP23H-EGFP foci were often in older, more distal OS disks. Electron micrographs of OS revealed abnormal disk membranes, with the regular disk bilayers broken into vesiculotubular structures. Furthermore, we observed similar OS disturbances in transgenic mice expressing RhoP23H, suggesting such structures are a general consequence of mutant expression. Together these results show that mutant opsin disrupts OS disks, destabilizing the outer segment possibly via the formation of aggregates. This may render rods susceptible to mechanical injury or compromise OS function, contributing to photoreceptor loss.
Introduction
The most common allele in North America for autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa, a major cause of retinal degeneration and vision loss worldwide [1], is a missense mutation (P23H) in the gene encoding rhodopsin [2]. The molecular pathophysiology that leads to eventual photoreceptor death is unclear. The accumulation of misfolded RhoP23H in the endoplasmic reticulum was proposed to cause cellular stress [3], however strong support in photoreceptors is lacking. A common feature of mechanisms proposed to explain cell loss in retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is misfolded protein retention and eventual aggregation in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) inducing severe cellular stress [4]. In several different cultured mammalian cell lines [3], [5], RhoP23H was prominent in the cytoplasm and formed aggregates resembling inclusion bodies and aggresomes similar to those described in other diseases such as cystic fibrosis (CFTR) and the early-onset familial Alzheimer's disease (PS1) [6]. RhoP23H causes loss of rods and retinal degeneration in many different animal models including mouse [7]–[9], rat [10], [11], pig [12], frog [13] and even in flies [14]. A serious complication is the gene dosage effect, since relative protein levels of RhoP23H and wild type rhodopsin influence rod degeneration [7], [13], [15]. Studies of the pathogenic mechanism have focused on the cellular distribution of RhoP23H. In some animal models, rhodopsin has been found in both inner and outer segments [13], [15], although this has not been observed in RhoP23H knock-in mice [9]. All animal models show a disturbance of the OS in terms of length, with eventual OS disorganization as rods die. However, the cause of the cellular toxicity has not been identified. We have investigated whether protein aggregates, the central premise of pathological mechanism in neurodegenerative diseases [16], occur in rods expressing RhoP23H. We have quantified the distribution and properties of a RhoP23H-EGFP fusion protein in transgenic Xenopus, a system well-suited for live cell imaging. Focusing on rods with low fluorescent protein expression levels has allowed us to characterize primary properties of the mutant protein and avoid the complications of overexpression.
Results and Discussion
Quantitative analysis of Rho-EGFP and RhoP23H-EGFP distributions in transgenic Xenopus rods showed a marked difference between the two fusion proteins (Fig. 1,2,3 and Fig. S1). Rho-EGFP localized primarily in the OS of mature rods, while RhoP23H-EGFP was distributed in both OS and inner segments (IS), localizing around the nucleus and more diffusely in the ellipsoid and myoid areas but not in the synaptic region. The retinal phenotype from the RhoP23H-EGFP depended strongly on the expression level of the transgene, with the most severe effects in those retina with highest concentration of RhoP23H-EGFP in rods prior to degeneration (Fig. S1, see also [13]). These include shortening and loss of the OS, mislocalization in the IS and abnormal shedding events. In order to investigate the intrinsic properties of RhoP23H-EGFP in non-degenerating rods, we focused on those transgenic animals with expression levels that were less than ∼5% of the endogenous level in both primary transgenic animals and different transgenic lines (Table 1). We note that there was a significant attenuation of RhoP23H-EGFP expression levels over several weeks in all animals. This reduction in expression level was not accompanied by a loss in rod number. Comparable reduction in transgene expression was not observed in animals expressing either Rho-EGFP (Fig. S1) or even soluble EGFP (data not shown) even though expression levels were much higher.
Table 1. Quantification of rhodopsin-EGFP transgenes in Xenopus rods.
To directly compare the behavior of Rho and RhoP23H in the same cell, transgenic animals were produced using dual transgene expression constructs consisting of two rhodopsin cassettes in tandem. Both Rho-EGFP and Rho-mCherry exhibited a regular transverse banding in the OS (Fig. 2a, d) that is related to the diurnal variation in rhodopsin density in the OS membranes (Haeri et al., in preparation). However, mutant opsin exhibited abnormal foci that contained high concentrations of fluorescent mutant protein in both the IS and OS (Fig. 2b). Foci were observed independent of the fluorescent protein fused to its carboxyl terminus (EGFP, Fig. 2 and mCherry, Fig. S5). The wild type protein did not show a co-concentration with the mutant fluorescent foci (Fig. 2d). Rods expressing RhoP23H-EGFP imaged along the axial length of the OS showed fluorescent foci in the mid-periphery of OS disks (Fig. 2f). This is in contrast to the behavior of Rho-EGFP that was found throughout the axial optical section (Fig. 2f), but was typically at much reduced concentration in disk incisures (Fig. S4). This reduction of RhoP23H-EGFP from disk incisures was not observed (Fig. 2). Quantitative analysis of fluorescent protein concentrations strongly suggests that foci formation is specific to the mutant protein, since the concentration of RhoP23H-EGFP is much lower than the co-expressed wild type transgene (Figs. 2 and 3) and endogenous rhodopsin (Table 1). It is important to note that although the transcript levels for RhoP23H-EGFP and co-expressed Rho-mCherry are very similar (Fig. S2), the protein concentrations are very different (Table 1 and Fig. 3). Thus, there is either increased protein degradation or decreased translation of the RhoP23H-EGFP transcript, or both, in mutant-expressing rods. A similar finding has been reported for knock-in RhoP23H mice [9].
Daily membrane biosynthesis adds approximately 80 disks at the base of Xenopus OS every day, which is equivalent to ∼1.2 µm in OS length [17]. Thus, the OS contains a record of the rhodopsin biosynthesis over more than 4 weeks, with the oldest disks at the apical end. We quantified the number of foci in two regions of the OS, base and central. We restricted the analysis to the proximal half of the OS to minimize in vitro artifacts introduced by OS damage, e.g. breakage or swelling. There were a highly variable number of foci found per OS, from absent to more than 20. It is important to note that the experiments reported here did not characterize fluorescent foci less than 0.4 µm. The foci had different shapes and sizes, but it was possible to count the number of distinct foci per OS. We found more fluorescent foci in the central region than in the basal region, i.e. in older OS membranes (Fig. 2e). These results suggest that the probability of forming foci or having them reach a detectable size may be a slow process.
We used fluorescent recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) in live retinal explants expressing RhoP23H-EGFP to characterize the mobility of the protein within the fluorescent foci. Both soluble EGFP and Rho-EGFP (Fig. 4) exhibited a single component fluorescence recovery profile after photobleaching expected for a mobile protein [18]. Since Rho-EGFP is restricted to movement within the disk, lateral recovery is the dominant factor in the FRAP signal. Thus, this diffusion occurs in the plane of the disk membrane and fluorescence recovery after photobleaching arises from fluorescent proteins diffusing laterally into the photobleached area. Under these experimental conditions, photobleaching of the targeted area (white box in Fig. 4 b–f) takes several seconds. The diffusion of fluorescent rhodopsin is rapid enough so that a decrease in the fluorescence density (∼30%) of the unbleached, laterally adjacent area is observed in the first scans after photobleaching (Fig. 4g, neighboring area). We note that the images are confocal scans from the photobleached optical plane; lateral diffusion of fluorescent rhodopsin also arises from fluorescent protein in front of and behind the bleached area.
We characterized RhoP23H-EGFP FRAP profiles of protein in three different regions: OS areas without dense protein-foci (Fig. 4c), IS (Fig. 4d) and OS (Fig. 4e,f) areas that contain fluorescent foci. The IS fluorescent foci are in the regions of the cell that contain both ER and Golgi (Fig. 1). To facilitate comparison between the rates of fluorescence recovery in these regions, we normalized the relative fluorescence changes in the photobleached areas (Fig. 4h). The average FRAP profile of RhoP23H-EGFP at the base of OS, where dense protein foci were not detectable, was similar to the profile found for Rho-EGFP (Fig. 4h). Moreover, the IS foci (Fig. 4d) had a fluorescence recovery in the photobleached area (Fig. 4h) and a decrement of fluorescence in the neighborhood of the photobleached area (Fig. 4d) similar to Rho-EGFP. These results show that, at least in photoreceptors, the RhoP23H-EGFP within IS foci is similar to wild type protein and more mobile than expected for protein found in aggresomes [3].
By contrast, areas with fluorescent foci in the OS showed no recovery from photobleaching (Fig. 4e, i), even though the foci were bleached in a way that left adjacent fluorescent regions intact. We found that highly fluorescent foci adjacent to a photobleached area did not exhibit any decrease in fluorescence, i.e. fluorescent protein in the foci was not able to move to a neighboring areas (Fig. 4e, i). These results indicate that the foci in the OS and IS have disparate physical properties and highlight that RhoP23H-EGFP has inherent mobility similar to Rho-EGFP when not found in fluorescent foci. This suggests either a change over time or in the cellular environment that causes the mutant protein to become immobile, e.g. aggregation or disk membrane breakdown.
Cells expressing RhoP23H-EGFP with fluorescent foci often exhibited disturbances of the OS in differential interference contrast micrographs (Fig. 5a, d). The disturbances coincided with foci (Fig. 5b, e) and were not observed in OS containing Rho-EGFP or RhoP23H-EGFP without foci. OS morphology of transgenic animals that express Rho-EGFP was indistinguishable from non-transgenic animals, exhibiting many closely stacked disks in electron micrographs (Fig. 5f). However, OS containing mutant opsin had vesiculotubular structures (VT) between 50–400 nm in diameter in a single section (Fig. 5h, i). The continuity of underlying disk membranes was totally disrupted around the VTs (Fig. 5i). These were observed in 11 of the 70 cells examined from 4 animals. During preparation for electron microscopy, tissue damage sometimes occurred, causing breaks or distortions in the outer segment (Fig. 5g). These defects were distinct and easily distinguished from the VTs. We also examined a mouse line containing a RhoP23H transgene [8] and found similar VT structures (Fig. 5l, m). These results provide strong evidence for a common process underlying OS disruption in vertebrates. Furthermore, they suggest that RhoP23H functions at low concentrations compared to wild type protein, catalyzing local changes in disk membranes, possibly through homo-oligomerization. Future work should be directed toward establishing a molecular mechanism for this process.
Previous work has reported disruptions of degenerating OS in mice expressing a RhoP23H transgene [7]–[9]. Abnormal OS membranes are also formed in Xenopus retina treated with tunicamycin [19] and in rats deprived of vitamin A [20]. However, the underlying causes have not been established. This report established that low level expression of mutant opsin leads to a destructive effect on disk membranes via subcellular microstructures. We hypothesize that the mutant protein undergoes self-aggregation with age (Fig. 6). Apparently, either the RhoP23H-EGFP is not present in the IS long enough to form immobile aggregates or there are factors not present in the OS that prevent their formation. It is possible that misfolded opsin, i.e. protein that cannot bind 11-cis retinal, is responsible for fluorescent foci formation. However, since RhoP23H retains the ability to bind 11-cis retinal [21], additional experiments using other mutants with more severe defects (e.g. RhoC187R-EGFP) will be necessary to clarify this point. Our results highlight that even with a robust protein quality control response that leads to a decrease in mutant protein expression, small amounts of mutant protein that escape the ER and are transported to the OS can have a deleterious effect on the cell. As such, this report proposes a novel mechanism for the toxic effect of opsin mutants. The damaged disk membranes are potentially more susceptible to mechanical injury or instability, resulting in their collapse.
Autosomal dominant RP is a slow disease [22], in which rods may up-regulate the UPR [4] and degrade mutant opsin (including aggregates in the IS). However, over time, some mutant opsin may escape to the OS and undergo a time-dependent aggregation leading to VT formation. Daily disk shedding will remove defective membrane and reduce potential toxicity, acting as another quality control step. Eventually, VTs may persist and cause mechanical breakdown. This process of membrane destabilization may also be relevant to Alzheimer's disease and other common neurodegenerative diseases [16].
Materials and Methods
Transgenic animals
Animals expressing rhodopsin transgenes in rods were produced by restriction enzyme mediated integration into Xenopus sperm nuclei as previously described with modifications [23]–[26]. Plasmids containing transgenes were linearized with XhoI or NheI (New England Biolabs) and purified prior to injection. GFP expression in live tadpoles was estimated using a fluorescence dissecting microscope (Leica MZ FL III) and divided into three intensity groups (bright, medium and faint) according to an arbitrary scale based upon photographic exposure times, using soluble GFP for comparison. Animals were maintained on a 12 h-12 h light-dark cycle at 18–20°C. All animal handling and experiments were in agreement with the animal care and use guidelines of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO). This study was done under the approval of the SUNY Upstate Medical University Committee on the Human Use of Animals (CHUA no. 209).
Transgenic DNA constructs
The Rho-EGFP cDNA encoded amino acids 1–354 of Xenopus rhodopsin [27] fused in frame with EGFP followed by the 1D4 epitope (ETSQVAPA) [28] at the carboxyl terminus [29]. Mutations were introduced into the Rho-EGFP cDNA using QuikChange II XL (Stratagene). The promoter used in all experiments was a fragment containing nucleotides −503 to +41 from the Xenopus opsin (XOP) gene [31]. Dual transgene expression constructs consisted of two XOP(−503/+41)-Rho-EGFP/mCherry (or RhoP23H-EGFP/mCherry) cassettes in tandem. All protein coding regions were sequenced on both strands and then linearized with XhoI or NheI prior to transgenesis.
Immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy
For immunohistochemistry, eyes were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS at 4°C and frozen in OCT (TissueTek Inc.). Frozen blocks were sectioned at 12–20 µm slices with a Microm 560 cryostat (Richard Allen Scientific) and immunostained with primary antibody overnight at 4°C, washed and then incubated with appropriate conjugated secondary antibody. Primary antibodies used were mouse anti-rhodopsin 4D2 (1∶3000) and anti-mouse secondary antibody (Jackson ImmunoResearch) conjugated to Cy3 (1∶500). Slides were examined with the i-80 series (Nikon) or LSM-510 confocal microscopes (Zeiss). For preparation of EM sections, eyes were fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde and 1% OsO4 and embedded in epoxy resin.
Total RNA extraction and qPCR
Six retina without retinal pigmented epithelium were isolated and used for total RNA extraction. cDNA was generated using QuantiTect™ Reverse Transcription Kit (Qiagen) and real time PCR was performed using SYBR Green MasterMix I and the LightCycler® 480 Real-Time PCR System (Roche Applied Science). Data were analyzed by the LightCycler® software and plotted using Sigmaplot (Systat).
Live cell imaging
The recording chamber was made in the center of a 5 cm plastic Petri dish as described previously [30]. The bottom of the chamber was comprised of a number 1 coverslip attached to the bottom of the chamber permitting the access of the microscope lenses. Retinal explants were minced into small pieces and placed into the chamber with Ringer's solution (in mM: NaCl 111, KCl 2, CaCl2 1, MgCl2 1, MgSO4 0.5, NaH2PO4 0.5, HEPES 3, glucose 10, EDTA 0.01). The chamber was then covered by a number 1 coverslip and placed onto the microscope stage for imaging. For quantification of foci, seven tadpoles from two transgenic lines expressing mutant opsin (RhoP23H-EGFP) were examined by live imaging. Data was collected from 17 different retinal explants (∼70% exhibited foci). 41 out of 254 cells explants demonstrated fluorescent foci.
Quantification of proteins by confocal microscopy
Images for quantification of transgenic proteins expressed in rod photoreceptors were acquired using the LSM-510 software driving a confocal LSM-510 imaging system (Zeiss). Retinal explants were immersed in frog Ringer's solution and scanned by a laser line of 488 or 543 nm. The scanning objective for both channels was a Plan-Neofluar 63×/1.4 oil lens (Zeiss). To minimize the bleeding through channels, the emitted light from 488 nm excitation was filtered by a 500–535 nm filter, and the emitted light from the 543 nm excitation was filtered by a 655–710 band pass filter. The resolution of all scanned images was set to 0.04×0.04 µm in the xy plane. At least 5 z scans from the central area of the rod photoreceptor with a 0.5 µm interval were obtained. The LSM-510 software was set to correct for the z plane while scanning dual channels. The pixel time, pinhole diameter, amplifier offset and amplifier gain for all scans were set to 3 µs, 1.4 airy units, 0.1 and 1, respectively. Recombinant EGFP and mCherry at different concentrations were scanned at the same settings used for retinal explant imaging (Fig. S3).
Image analysis for protein quantification
Fluorescent intensities of images were measured using AxioVision™ software version 4.7 (Zeiss), corrected for the background intensity, and averaged values of at least three z sections were used for protein measurements. The measured fluorescent intensities were converted to protein concentration using values obtained from scanned fluorescent solutions containing known concentrations of recombinant fluorescent proteins (Fig. S3).
FRAP analysis by confocal microscopy
For acquisition of images in FRAP experiments the LSM software version 2.8 was used to drive a LSM-510 confocal microscope. Retinal explants were prepared as previously described and imaged using a Plan-Neofluar 63×/1.4 oil lens (Zeiss). The laser line for scanning with 488 nm light powered by an Argon laser was set at 21 milliwatt. The laser power for image acquisition before and after photobleaching was set to 0.5–4% of the maximum laser power and to 100% during photobleaching. The recording chamber was initially searched for retinal explants having rods which were parallel with the covering coverslip. A single rod photoreceptor was centered in the imaging window and 8 bit images in gray scale 255 were scanned usually from a square, 13.2×13.2 µm in xy plane, or 256×256 pixels. The photobleaching was performed in the central part of the OS or within dense fluorescent foci found in the IS in a rectangular region 1.8 µm in diameter and usually for 40 ms/µm2 per iteration. The laser scanning performed before photobleaching, during photobleaching and after, was in the same z axis. The images in the recovery phase were taken right after photobleaching and then every 3–5 seconds in time series of at least 25 recovery scans. FRAP data were analyzed using AxioVision™ software version 4.7 (Zeiss) and SigmaPlot™ (Systat Software Inc.). Briefly, the images were corrected for background fluorescence and the averaged intensity of the selected area was measured (AxioVision™) and plotted. The averaged intensity of the recovering area was normalized to the non-bleached neighboring area in each scanned image. The time for recovery to 50% of maximum fluorescence (t1/2) was measured by fitting a one parameter exponential function using SigmaPlot. The error bars show the SEM.
Supporting Information
Acknowledgments
We thank Drs. P. Calvert and E. Pugh for assistance in initial transgene quantification and helpful comments on the manuscript, Dr. M. Chen for producing the molecular models, Drs. E. Solessio, F. Pignoni and S. Reks and Ms. A. Adekeye for helpful comments and suggestions on the manuscript, Ms. J. Qi for EM assistance and Dr. G. Threatte for providing access to the EM core.
Footnotes
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Funding: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health Grants EY-11256 and EY-12975 (to BEK), Research to Prevent Blindness (Unrestricted Grant to State University of New York, Upstate Medical University, Department of Ophthalmology), Fight For Sight, and Lions of Central New York. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
References
- 1.Hartong DT, Berson EL, Dryja TP. Retinitis pigmentosa. Lancet. 2006;368:1795–1809. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69740-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Sullivan LS, Bowne SJ, Birch DG, Hughbanks-Wheaton D, Heckenlively JR, et al. Prevalence of disease-causing mutations in families with autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa: a screen of known genes in 200 families. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;47:3052–3064. doi: 10.1167/iovs.05-1443. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Saliba RS, Munro PMG, Luthert PJ, Cheetham ME. The cellular fate of mutant rhodopsin: quality control, degradation and aggresome formation. J Cell Sci. 2002;115:2907–2918. doi: 10.1242/jcs.115.14.2907. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Mendes HF, van der Spuy J, Chapple JP, Cheetham ME. Mechanisms of cell death in rhodopsin retinitis pigmentosa: implications for therapy. Trends Mol Med. 2005;11:177–185. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2005.02.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Noorwez SM, Malhotra R, McDowell JH, Smith KA, Krebs MP, et al. Retinoids assist the cellular folding of the autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa opsin mutant P23H. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:16278–16284. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M312101200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Johnston JA, Ward CL, Kopito RR. Aggresomes: A Cellular Response to Misfolded Proteins. J Cell Biol. 1998;143:1883–1898. doi: 10.1083/jcb.143.7.1883. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Olsson JE, Gordon JW, Pawlyk BS, Roof D, Hayes A, et al. Transgenic mice with a rhodopsin mutation (Pro23His): a mouse model of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Neuron. 1992;9:815–830. doi: 10.1016/0896-6273(92)90236-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Naash MI, Hollyfield JG, al-Ubaidi MR, Baehr W. Simulation of human autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa in transgenic mice expressing a mutated murine opsin gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1993;90:5499–5503. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.12.5499. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Sakami S, Maeda T, Bereta G, Okano K, Golczak M, et al. Probing mechanisms of photoreceptor degeneration in a new mouse model of the common form of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa due to P23H opsin mutations. J Biol Chem. 2011;286:10551–10567. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.209759. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Lewin AS, Drenser KA, Hauswirth WW, Nishikawa S, Yasumura D, et al. Ribozyme rescue of photoreceptor cells in a transgenic rat model of autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa. Nat Med. 1998;4:967–971. doi: 10.1038/nm0898-967. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Machida S, Kondo M, Jamison JA, Khan NW, Kononen LT, et al. P23H rhodopsin transgenic rat: correlation of retinal function with histopathology. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:3200–3209. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Petters RM, Alexander CA, Wells KD, Collins EB, Sommer JR, et al. Genetically engineered large animal model for studying cone photoreceptor survival and degeneration in retinitis pigmentosa. Nat Biotechnol. 1997;15:965–970. doi: 10.1038/nbt1097-965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Tam BM, Moritz OL. Characterization of rhodopsin P23H-induced retinal degeneration in a Xenopus laevis model of retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:3234–3241. doi: 10.1167/iovs.06-0213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Galy A, Roux MJ, Sahel JA, Léveillard T, Giangrande A. Rhodopsin maturation defects induce photoreceptor death by apoptosis: a fly model for RhodopsinPro23His human retinitis pigmentosa. Hum Mol Genet. 2005;14:2547–2557. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddi258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Frederick JM, Krasnoperova NV, Hoffmann K, Church-Kopish J, Rüther K, et al. Mutant rhodopsin transgene expression on a null background. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:826–833. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Dillin A, Cohen E. Ageing and protein aggregation-mediated disorders: from invertebrates to mammals. Philos Trans R Soc Lond, B, Biol Sci. 2011;366:94–98. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Besharse JC. Light and membrane biogenesis in rod photoreceptors of vertebrates: The effects of constant light on visual processes, In: Williams T, editor. “Light and Membrane Biogenesis”. Plenum, New York; 1979. pp. 409–431. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Calvert PD, Schiesser WE, Pugh EN. Diffusion of a soluble protein, photoactivatable GFP, through a sensory cilium. J Gen Physiol. 2010;135:173–196. doi: 10.1085/jgp.200910322. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Ulshafer RJ, Allen CB, Fliesler SJ. Tunicamycin-induced dysgenesis of retinal rod outer segment membranes. I. A scanning electron microscopy study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1986;27:1587–1594. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Dowling J, Gibbons IR. The effect of vitamin A deficiency on the fine structure of the retina, In: Smelser GK, editor. “The Structure of the Eye”. Academic Press, New York; 1961. pp. 85–99. [Google Scholar]
- 21.McKibbin C, Toye AM, Reeves PJ, Khorana HG, Edwards PC, et al. Opsin stability and folding: the role of Cys185 and abnormal disulfide bond formation in the intradiscal domain. J Mol Biol. 2007;374:1309–1318. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.10.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Berson E. Retinitis pigmentosa: The Friedenwald Lecture. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:1659–1676. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Knox BE, Schlueter C, Sanger BM, Green CB, Besharse JC. Transgene expression in Xenopus rods. FEBS Lett. 1998;423:117–121. doi: 10.1016/s0014-5793(98)00018-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Batni S, Mani S, Schlueter C, Ji M, Knox BE. Xenopus rod photoreceptor: model for expression of retinal genes. Meth Enzymol. 2000;316:50–64. doi: 10.1016/s0076-6879(00)16716-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Whitaker SL, Knox BE. Conserved transcriptional activators of the Xenopus rhodopsin gene. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:49010–49018. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M406080200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Haeri M, Knox BE. Generation of transgenic Xenopus using restriction enzyme-mediated integration. Methods Mol Biol. 2011 doi: 10.1007/978-1-61779-848-1_2. In press. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Batni S, Scalzetti L, Moody SA, Knox BE. Characterization of the Xenopus rhodopsin gene. J Biol Chem. 1996;271:3179–3186. doi: 10.1074/jbc.271.6.3179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.MacKenzie D, Arendt A, Hargrave P, McDowell JH, Molday RS. Localization of binding sites for carboxyl terminal specific anti-rhodopsin monoclonal antibodies using synthetic peptides. Biochemistry. 1984;23:6544–6549. doi: 10.1021/bi00321a041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Moritz OL, Tam BM, Papermaster DS, Nakayama TA. Functional rhodopsin-green fluorescent protein fusion protein localizes correctly in transgenic Xenopus laevis retinal rods and is expressed in a time-dependent pattern. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:28242–28251. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M101476200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Peet JA, Bragin A, Calvert PD, Nikonov SS, Mani S, et al. Quantification of the cytoplasmic spaces of living cells with EGFP reveals arrestin-EGFP to be in disequilibrium in dark adapted rod photoreceptors. J Cell Sci. 2004;117:3049–3059. doi: 10.1242/jcs.01167. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Mani SS, Batni S, Whitaker L, Chen S, Engbretson G, et al. Xenopus rhodopsin promoter: Identification of immediate upstream sequences necessary for high level, rod-specific transcription. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:36557–36565. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M101685200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Papermaster DS, Dreyer WJ. Rhodopsin content in the outer segment membranes of bovine and frog retinal rods. Biochemistry. 1974;13:2438–2444. doi: 10.1021/bi00708a031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Okada T, Fujiyoshi Y, Silow M, Navarro J, Landau EM, et al. Functional role of internal water molecules in rhodopsin revealed by X-ray crystallography. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99:5982–5987. doi: 10.1073/pnas.082666399. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Sokolov M, Lyubarsky AL, Strissel KJ, Savchenko AB, Govardovskii VI, et al. Massive light-driven translocation of transducin between the two major compartments of rod cells: a novel mechanism of light adaptation. Neuron. 2002;34:95–106. doi: 10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00636-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.