4.7 Article

Critical role for TARPs in early development despite broad functional redundancy

期刊

NEUROPHARMACOLOGY
卷 56, 期 1, 页码 22-29

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2008.06.037

关键词

AMPA receptor; Stargazer; Stargazin; TARP; Knockout mice; Glutamate; Excitatory amino acid receptor; Electrophysiology; Neurotransmission; Neurotransmitter; Membrane trafficking; LTP; Hippocampus; CA1; Spinal cord; Cortex; CACNG

资金

  1. N.I.H.
  2. Epilepsy Foundation
  3. Larry L. Hillblom Foundation
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R01MH070957] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transmembrane AMPA receptor regulatory proteins (TARPs), including gamma-2, gamma-3, gamma-4, and gamma-8, are auxiliary subunits for AMPA receptors. Based on studies in single knockout mice, it has been suggested that nearly all native AMPA receptors are associated with TARPs. To study the interplay between TARP family members and AMPA receptors in vivo, we generated mice lacking multiple TARPs. Triple knockout mice lacking gamma-3, gamma-4, and gamma-8 are viable and fertile, and synaptic AMPA receptor activity is reduced to a level comparable to that seen in gamma-8 single knockout mice. In contrast, triple knockout mice lacking gamma-2, gamma-3, and either gamma-4 or gamma-8 cannot survive ex utero. In particular, gamma-2, gamma-3, gamma-4 triple knockout mice are born apneic and paralyzed, despite normal AMPA receptor function in cortical and spinal neurons. We found that gamma-8 is expressed at low levels in early postnatal mice and regulates AMPA receptor levels at this developmental time period. Thus, the early expression of gamma-8 may be responsible for maintaining AMPA receptor functions in neonatal neurons. Together, our data indicate that TARPs, in particular gamma-2, are essential for early development, and that most neurons express multiple members of this functionally redundant protein family. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据