Stabilization of spine Synaptopodin by mGluR1 is required for mGluR-LTD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dendritic spines, actin-rich protrusions forming the postsynaptic sites of excitatory synapses, undergo activity-dependent molecular and structural remodeling. Activation of group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptors - mGluR1 and mGluR5 - by synaptic or pharmacological stimulation, induces LTD but whether this is accompanied with spine elimination remains unresolved. A subset of telencephalic mushroom spines contains the spine apparatus (SA), an enigmatic organelle composed of stacks of smooth endoplasmic reticulum, whose formation depends on the expression of the actin-bundling protein Synaptopodin. Allocation of Synaptopodin to spines appears governed by cell-intrinsic mechanisms as the relative frequency of spines harboring Synaptopodin is conserved in vivo and in vitro . Here we show that expression of Synaptopodin/SA in spines is required for induction of mGluR-LTD at Schaffer collateral-CA1 synapses. Post-mGluR-LTD, mushroom spines lacking Synaptopodin/SA are selectively lost whereas spines harboring it are preserved, a process dependent on activation of mGluR1 but not mGluR5. Mechanistically, we find that mGluR1 supports physical retention of Synaptopodin within excitatory spine synapses during LTD while triggering lysosome-dependent degradation of the protein residing in dendritic shafts. Together, these results reveal a cellular mechanism, dependent on mGluR1, which enables selective preservation of stronger spines containing Synaptopodin/SA while eliminating weaker ones and potentially countering spurious strengthening by de novo recruitment of Synaptopodin. Overall our results identify spines with Synaptopodin/SA as the locus of mGluR-LTD and underscore the importance of the molecular microanatomy of spines in synaptic plasticity.
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 | 0.001 |
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".