Developmental Changes in the Structure and Composition of the Postsynaptic Density

The development of the brain and its underlying circuitry is dependent on the formation of trillions of chemical synapses, which are highly specialized contacts that regulate the flow of information from one neuron to the next. It is through these synaptic connections that neurons wire together into networks capable of performing specific tasks, and activity-dependent changes in their structural and physiological state is one way that the brain is thought to adapt and store information. At the ultrastructural level, developmental and activity-dependent changes in the size and shape of dendritic spines have been well documented, and it is widely believed that structural changes in spines are a hallmark sign of synapse maturation and alteration of synaptic physiology. While changes in spine structure have been studied extensively, changes in one of its most prominent components, the postsynaptic density (PSD), have largely evaded observation. The PSD is a protein-rich organelle on the cytoplasmic side of the postsynaptic membrane, where it sits in direct opposition to the presynaptic terminal. The PSD functions both to cluster neurotransmitter receptors at the cell surface as well as organize the intracellular signaling molecules responsible for transducing extracellular signals to the postsynaptic cell. Much is known about the chemical composition of the PSD, but the structural arrangement of its molecular components is not well documented. Adding to the difficulty of understanding such a complex mass of protein machinery is the fact that its protein composition is known to change in response to synaptic activity, meaning that its structure is plastic and no two PSDs are identical. Here, immuno-gold labeling and electron tomography of PSDs isolated throughout development was used to track changes in both the structure and molecular composition of the PSD. State-of-the-art cryo-electron tomography was used to study the fine structure of the PSD during development, and provides an unprecedented glimpse into its molecular architecture in an un-fixed, unstained and hydrated state. Through this analysis, large structural and compositional changes are apparent and suggest a model by which the PSD is first assembled as a mesh-like lattice of proteins that function as support for the later recruitment of various PSD components. Spatial analysis of the recruitment of proteins into the PSD demonstrated that its assembly has an underlying order.

Functional requirements of histone deacetylases in Tup1-Ssn6 repression

The corepressor complex Tup1-Ssn6 regulates many classes of genes in yeast including cell type specific, glucose repressible, and DNA damage inducible. Tup1 and Ssn6 are recruited to target promoters through their interactions with specific DNA binding proteins such as α2, Mig1, and Crt1. Most promoters that are repressed by this corepressor complex exhibit a high degree of nucleosomal organization. This chromatin domain occludes transcription factor access to the promoter element resulting in gene repression. Previous work indicated that Tup1 interacts with underacetylated isoforms of H3 and H4, and that mutation of these histones synergistically compromises repression. These studies predict that Tup1-hypoacetyalted histone interaction is important to the repression mechanism, and in vivo hyperacetylation might compromise the corepressors ability to repress target genes. ^ One way to alter histone acetylation levels in vivo is to alter the balance between histone acetyltransferases and histone deacetylases. To date five histone deacetylases (HDACs) have been identified in yeast Rpd3, Hos1, Hos2, Hos3 and Hda1. Deletion of single or double HDAC genes had little to no effect on Tup1-Ssn6 repression, but simultaneous deletion of three specific activities Rpd3, Hos1, and Hos2 abolished repression in vivo. Promoter regions of Tup1-Ssn6 target genes in these triple deacetylase mutant cells are dramatically hyperacetylated in both H3 and H4. Examination of bulk histone acetylation levels showed that this specific HDAC triple mutant combination (rpd3 hos1 hos2) caused a dramatic and concomitant hyperacetylation of both H3 and H4. The loss of repression in the rpd3 hos1 hos2 cells, but not in other mutants, is consistent with previous observations, which indicate that histones provide redundant functions in the repression mechanism and that high levels of acetylation are required to prevent Tup1 binding. Investigation into a potential direct interaction between the Tup1-Ssn6 corepressor complex and one or more HDAC activities showed that both Rpd3 and Hos2 interact with the corepressor complex in vivo. These findings indicate that Tup1-Ssn6 repression involves the recruitment of histone deacetylase activities to target promoters, where they locally deacetylate histone residues promoting Tup1-histone tail interaction to initiate and/or maintain the repressed state. ^

Cytochrome P450 4F isoforms in different species: Identification, gene regulation and putative roles in inflammation

The cytochrome P450 4F subfamily comprises a group of enzymes that metabolize derivatives of arachidonic acid such as prostaglandins, lipoxins leukotrienes and hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acids, which are important mediators involved in the inflammatory response. Therefore, we speculate that CYP4Fs might be able to modulate the extent of the inflammation by controlling of the tissue levels of these inflammatory mediators, especially, leukotriene B4. One way to provide support for this hypothesis is to test whether the expression of CYP4Fs changes under inflammatory conditions, since these changes are required to adjust the levels of inflammatory mediators. ^ A lipopolysacchride (LPS) induced rat inflammation model was used to analyze the expressions of rat CYP4F4 and CYP4F5 in liver and kidney. LPS administration did not change the constitutive expression level of CYP4F4 and CYP4F5. In liver, the expressions of CYP4F4 and CYP4F5 decreased to 50–60% of the untreated level. The same effect of LPS on CYP4F4 and CYP4F5 expression can be mimicked in hepatocyte primary cultures treated with LPS, indicating a direct of effect of LPS on hepatocytes. LPS treatment also decreased the activity of liver microsomes towards chlorpromazine, however, antibody inhibition study revealed that liver CYP4Fs are not the only players in metabolizing chlorpromazine. To study further the underlying mechanism, CYP4F5 gene was isolated, characterized, and the promoter region was defined. ^ Accumulating evidence showed that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) play an active role in inflammation. To investigate the possible role of PPARα in regulating CYP4F expression by inflammation or by clofibrate treatment, the expressions of two new mouse 4F isoforms were analyzed in PPARα knockout mice upon LPS or clofibrate challenge. A novel induction of CYP4F15 by LPS and clofibrate was observed in kidney, and this effect is totally dependent on the presence of PPARα. Renal CYP4F16 expression was not affected by LPS or clofibrate in both (+/+) and (−/−) mice. In contrast, hepatic expressions of CYP4F15 and CYP4F16 were reduced significantly in (+/+) mice, but much less in (−/−) mice, suggesting that PPARα is partially responsible for this down-regulation. Clofibrate treatment reduced the expression of CYP4F16 in liver, but has no effect on CYP4F15 and PPARα does not have a role in hepatic CYP4F expression regulated by clofibrate. In general, CYP4Fs are regulated in an isoform-, tissue- and species-specific manner. ^ A human CYP4F isoform, CYP4F11, was isolated. The genomic structure was also solved by using database mining and bioinformatics tools. Localization of CYP4F11 to chromosome 19, 16 kb upstream of CYP4F2, suggests that human CYP4F genes may form a cluster on chromosome 19. This novel human 4F is highly expressed in liver, as well as in kidney, heart and skeletal muscle. Further study of the activity and gene regulation on CYP4F11 will provide us more insights into the physiological functions of CYP4F subfamily. ^

Identification and characterization of the vegetally localized Hermes mRNA

One way developing embryos regulate the expression of their genes is by localizing mRNAs to specific subcellular regions. In the oocyte of the frog, Xenopus laevis, many RNAs are localized specifically to the animal or the vegetal halves of the oocyte. The localization of these RNAs contributes to the primary polarity of the oocyte, the asymmetry that is the basis for patterning and lineage specification in the embryo. I have screened a cDNA library for clones containing the Xlsirt repeat, an element known to target RNAs to the vegetal cortex of the oocyte. I have identified seventeen cDNA clones that contain this element. One of these cDNAs encodes the RNA binding protein Hermes. The Hermes mRNA is localized to the vegetal cortex of the oocyte. Additionally, Hermes protein is also vegetally localized in the oocyte and is found in subcellular structures known to contain localized mRNAs. This suggests that Hermes might interact with localized RNAs. While Hermes protein is present in oocytes, it disappears at germinal vesicle breakdown during maturation. We therefore believe that the time period during which Hermes functions is during oogenesis or maturation prior to the time of Hermes degradation. To determine Hermes function, an antisense depletion strategy was used that involved injecting morpholino oligos (HE-MO) into oocytes. Injection of these morpholinos causes the level of Hennes protein to drop prematurely during maturation. Embryos produced from these oocytes exhibit cleavage defects that are most prevalent in the vegetal blastomeres. The phenotype can be partially rescued by injection of a heterologous Hermes mRNA and is therefore specific to Hermes. The Hermes expression and depletion results are consistent with a model in which Hermes interacts with one or more vegetally localized mRNAs in the oocyte and during the early stages of maturation. The interaction is required for cleavage of the vegetal blastomeres. Therefore, it is likely that at least one mRNA that interacts with Hermes is a cell cycle regulator. ^