Ca2+ Permeable AMPA Receptor Induced Long-Term Potentiation Requires PI3/MAP Kinases but Not Ca/CaM-Dependent Kinase II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ca(2+) influx via GluR2-lacking Ca(2+)-permeable AMPA glutamate receptors (CP-AMPARs) can trigger changes in synaptic efficacy in both interneurons and principle neurons, but the underlying mechanisms remain unknown. We took advantage of genetically altered mice with no or reduced GluR2, thus allowing the expression of synaptic CP-AMPARs, to investigate the molecular signaling process during CP-AMPAR-induced synaptic plasticity at CA1 synapses in the hippocampus. Utilizing electrophysiological techniques, we demonstrated that these receptors were capable of inducing numerous forms of long-term potentiation (referred to as CP-AMPAR dependent LTP) through a number of different induction protocols, including high-frequency stimulation (HFS) and theta-burst stimulation (TBS). This included a previously undemonstrated form of protein-synthesis dependent late-LTP (L-LTP) at CA1 synapses that is NMDA-receptor independent. This form of plasticity was completely blocked by the selective CP-AMPAR inhibitor IEM-1460, and found to be dependent on postsynaptic Ca(2+) ions through calcium chelator (BAPTA) studies. Surprisingly, Ca/CaM-dependent kinase II (CaMKII), the key protein kinase that is indispensable for NMDA-receptor dependent LTP at CA1 synapses appeared to be not required for the induction of CP-AMPAR dependent LTP due to the lack of effect of two separate pharmacological inhibitors (KN-62 and staurosporine) on this form of potentiation. Both KN-62 and staurosporine strongly inhibited NMDA-receptor dependent LTP in control studies. In contrast, inhibitors for PI3-kinase (LY294002 and wortmannin) or the MAPK cascade (PD98059 and U0126) significantly attenuated this CP-AMPAR-dependent LTP. Similarly, postsynaptic infusion of tetanus toxin (TeTx) light chain, an inhibitor of exocytosis, also had a significant inhibitory effect on this form of LTP. These results suggest that distinct synaptic signaling underlies GluR2-lacking CP-AMPAR-dependent LTP, and reinforces the recent notions that CP-AMPARs are important facilitators of synaptic plasticity in the brain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".