» Articles » PMID: 16751249

Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor Channel Electrostatics Determined by Diffusion-enhanced Luminescence Energy Transfer

Overview
Journal Biophys J
Publisher Cell Press
Specialty Biophysics
Date 2006 Jun 6
PMID 16751249
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The electrostatic potentials within the pore of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) were determined using lanthanide-based diffusion-enhanced fluorescence energy transfer experiments. Freely diffusing Tb3+ -chelates of varying charge constituted a set of energy transfer donors to the acceptor, crystal violet, a noncompetitive antagonist of the nAChR. Energy transfer from a neutral Tb3+ -chelate to nAChR-bound crystal violet was reduced 95% relative to the energy transfer to free crystal violet. This result indicated that crystal violet was strongly shielded from solvent when bound to the nAChR. Comparison of energy transfer from positively and negatively charged chelates indicate negative electrostatic potentials of -25 mV in the channel, measured in low ionic strength, and -10 mV measured in physiological ionic strength. Debye-Hückel analyses of potentials determined at various ionic strengths were consistent with 1-2 negative charges within 8 A of the crystal violet binding site. To complement the energy transfer experiments, the influence of pH and ionic strength on the binding of [3H]phencyclidine were determined. The ionic strength dependence of binding affinity was consistent with -3.3 charges within 8 A of the binding site, according to Debye-Hückel analysis. The pH dependence of binding had an apparent pKa of 7.2, a value indicative of a potential near -170 mV if the titratable residues are constituted of aspartates and glutamates. It is concluded that long-range potentials are small and likely contribute little to selectivity or conductance whereas close interactions are more likely to contribute to electrostatic stabilization of ions and binding of noncompetitive antagonists within the channel.

Citing Articles

Direct measurements of biomolecular electrostatics through experiments.

Iwahara J, Pettitt B, Yu B Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2023; 82:102680.

PMID: 37573815 PMC: 10947535. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbi.2023.102680.


A Broad G Protein-Coupled Receptor Internalization Assay that Combines SNAP-Tag Labeling, Diffusion-Enhanced Resonance Energy Transfer, and a Highly Emissive Terbium Cryptate.

Levoye A, Zwier J, Jaracz-Ros A, Klipfel L, Cottet M, Maurel D Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2015; 6:167.

PMID: 26617570 PMC: 4638144. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2015.00167.


FRET in Membrane Biophysics: An Overview.

Loura L, Prieto M Front Physiol. 2011; 2:82.

PMID: 22110442 PMC: 3216123. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2011.00082.


In glycine and GABA(A) channels, different subunits contribute asymmetrically to channel conductance via residues in the extracellular domain.

Moroni M, Meyer J, Lahmann C, Sivilotti L J Biol Chem. 2011; 286(15):13414-22.

PMID: 21343294 PMC: 3075687. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M110.204610.


Structural answers and persistent questions about how nicotinic receptors work.

Wells G Front Biosci. 2008; 13:5479-510.

PMID: 18508600 PMC: 2430769. DOI: 10.2741/3094.


References
1.
Wensel T, Chang C, Meares C . Diffusion-enhanced lanthanide energy-transfer study of DNA-bound cobalt(III) bleomycins: comparisons of accessibility and electrostatic potential with DNA complexes of ethidium and acridine orange. Biochemistry. 1985; 24(12):3060-9. DOI: 10.1021/bi00333a039. View

2.
Imoto K, Methfessel C, Sakmann B, Mishina M, Mori Y, Konno T . Location of a delta-subunit region determining ion transport through the acetylcholine receptor channel. Nature. 1986; 324(6098):670-4. DOI: 10.1038/324670a0. View

3.
Miyazawa A, Fujiyoshi Y, Stowell M, Unwin N . Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor at 4.6 A resolution: transverse tunnels in the channel wall. J Mol Biol. 1999; 288(4):765-86. DOI: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.2721. View

4.
Wade R, Gabdoulline R, Ludemann S, Lounnas V . Electrostatic steering and ionic tethering in enzyme-ligand binding: insights from simulations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998; 95(11):5942-9. PMC: 34177. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.11.5942. View

5.
Jordan P . How pore mouth charge distributions alter the permeability of transmembrane ionic channels. Biophys J. 1987; 51(2):297-311. PMC: 1329891. DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3495(87)83336-2. View