Previous Article | Next Article 
Volume 17, Number 18,
Issue of September 15, 1997
pp. 6961-6973
Copyright ©1997 Society for Neuroscience
Linearized Buffered Ca2+ Diffusion in Microdomains
and Its Implications for Calculation of [Ca2+] at the
Mouth of a Calcium Channel
Mohammad Naraghi and
Erwin Neher
Department of Membrane Biophysics, Max-Planck-Institute for
Biophysical Chemistry, D-37070 Göttingen, Germany
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATHEMATICAL MODEL
DISCUSSION
FOOTNOTES
APPENDIX
REFERENCES
ABSTRACT
Immobile and mobile calcium buffers shape the calcium signal close
to a channel by reducing and localizing the transient calcium increase
to physiological compartments. In this paper, we focus on the impact of
mobile buffers in shaping steady-state calcium gradients in the
vicinity of an open channel, i.e. within its "calcium microdomain."
We present a linear approximation of the combined reaction-diffusion
problem, which can be solved explicitly and accounts for an arbitrary
number of calcium buffers, either endogenous or added exogenously. It
is valid for small saturation levels of the present buffers and shows
that within a few hundred nanometers from the channel, standing calcium
gradients develop in hundreds of microseconds after channel opening. It
is shown that every buffer can be assigned a uniquely defined
length-constant as a measure of its capability to buffer calcium close
to the channel. The length-constant clarifies intuitively the
significance of buffer binding and unbinding kinetics for understanding
local calcium signals. Hence, we examine the parameters shaping these steady-state gradients. The model can be used to check the expected influence of single channel calcium microdomains on physiological processes such as excitation-secretion coupling or
excitation-contraction coupling and to explore the differential effect
of kinetic buffer parameters on the shape of these microdomains.
Key words:
Ca2+ microdomains;
Ca2+ diffusion;
Ca2+ buffers;
buffer
kinetics;
diffusion modeling;
synaptic transmission
INTRODUCTION
Calcium is involved in a multitude
of fast intracellular signal transduction mechanisms ranging from
excitation-contraction coupling to synaptic transmission (Augustine et
al., 1985
; Cheng et al., 1993
; Bruns and Jahn, 1995
; Clapham, 1995
). To
achieve a high bandwidth of signal transmission at specific sites, the cell needs to localize the calcium signals in time and space. Mobile
calcium buffers are elegant tools to achieve this temporal and spatial
functional compartmentalization (Roberts, 1994
): mobile calcium buffers
act as calcium shuttles or sinks to produce steep gradients in a close
neighborhood of channels. In these "calcium microdomains,"
[Ca2+] readily reaches many tens of micromolar
levels to activate low-affinity processes. Complementary to this, the
microdomains dissipate very rapidly by virtue of the mobilities of the
buffers.
Recent experimental studies (Eilers et al., 1995
; Yuste and Denk,
1995
) have used imaging techniques to observe the temporal and spatial
dynamics of [Ca2+] in different cell types.
Unfortunately, currently available imaging technology does not
simultaneously provide a sufficiently high resolution in time and
space. Temporal resolution is sacrificed to get a decent spatial
resolution, or vice versa. This dilemma, in concert with the insight
that "Ca2+ signaling takes the local route"
(Augustine and Neher, 1992b
), has in turn triggered a huge body of
simulation studies that attempt to calculate the expected time course
of calcium concentration increases and their spatial extent (Simon and
Llinas, 1985
; Stern, 1992
; Nowycky and Pinter, 1993
; Roberts, 1994
;
Klingauf and Neher, 1997
) in the presence of multiple buffers.
From these simulations, we have learned about the impact of
cellular buffers on calcium signaling, but each simulation represents only one point in a multidimensional parameter space. Nevertheless, it
would be helpful if we could make a compromise between the computational and the analytical complexity of the buffered diffusion problem. One approach is to linearize the corresponding differential equations. It was first done for one mobile buffer (Neher, 1986
), which
was assumed not to change its concentration by binding to calcium, a
reasonable approximation if a high concentration of a mobile chelator
is present. Later, Stern (1992)
considered a channel as a point source
in an isotropic medium and approximated the steady-state calcium
concentration profiles surrounding the source in terms of nonlinear
integral representations. More recently, Pape et al. (1995)
calculated
the concentration profiles of Ca2+ and a mobile
buffer for "small saturation levels" of the buffer. Within the
limit of no spatial gradients of the mobile buffer (by virtue of its
high concentration), they achieved the results of Neher (1986)
and
Stern (1992)
.
In the present paper, we extend this approach to an arbitrary
number of mobile buffers. We derive analytical solutions for the
steady-state profiles of calcium and calcium-bound buffers surrounding
a channel as a point source. It is shown that in the range of tens of
nanometers, the effectiveness of buffered solutions depends strongly on
chemical kinetics and diffusional mobility of the buffers. The results
are used to discuss relative effects of BAPTA and EGTA (Borst and
Sakmann, 1996
) in blocking synaptic transmission.
MATHEMATICAL MODEL
We will be considering the concentration profiles of calcium and
calcium-bound buffers around a single calcium channel. In particular,
as we will see in the sequel we can focus on steady-state gradients
because the concentration profiles stabilize rapidly in the vicinity of
a channel after its opening. Thus, the first step is to show why we can
only consider mobile buffers to be present in the course of our
analysis.
I. Immobile buffers do not affect the standing
calcium gradients around an open calcium channel. Let us consider
the interaction of calcium ions with N different buffer
species (which we shall denote by B1,
B2, ... , BN) in a reaction
cell according to the kinetic scheme:
|
(1)
|
The parameters ki and
k
i are the kinetic rate constants of this
reaction in units of 1/(M.sec) and 1/sec, respectively. Furthermore, we
denote by Ki the dissociation constant of the i-th buffer (under the specific pH and temperature conditions) given by
Ki = k
i/ki. If there are no
sources or sinks for the buffers Bi (which we assume to be
the case here), the notion of the total concentration of the i-th
species in the reaction volume is a well defined conserved quantity,
i.e.: [Bi]T
[Bi] + [CaBi]. For the sake of simplicity, we shall further make
use of the following abbreviations in the rest of this paper:
yi
[CaBi],
yN+1
[Ca2+],
xi
[Bi], i = 1, ... , N.
Taking into account the diffusive mobility of all molecules, say in an
isotropic reaction medium, we need to introduce the diffusion
coefficients of calcium ions, DN+1
DCa, as well as that of the free form of
Bi, DBi, and of
its calcium-bound form, DCaBi. The
spatiotemporal evolution of the concentrations is then incorporated
into a system of partial differential equations given by:
|
(2)
|
where
is the Laplace operator. Assuming that
DBi = DCaBi
Di, we can add the first and last
equation of the system (2) to get the following equation for the new
variable zi = xi + yi:
|
(3)
|
which is the standard diffusion equation for the total i-th
buffer. If the buffer is homogenously distributed in the cell at time
zero, i.e. zi(t = 0,
)
[Bi]T for all space coordinates
, the unique solution to Equation 3 is just the
constant zi(t,
)
[Bi]T. This means that the total
buffer remains spatially constant in the sample if this was the case at
time zero. Assuming this in the following, we can now simplify Equation 2 to get the following system:
|
(4)
|
describing the dynamics of concentration changes attributable to
diffusion and reaction in three dimensions. Several studies have
investigated the temporal evolution of this system for specified geometries, initial and boundary conditions with or without
simplifications. The objective often was to calculate the concentration
of free calcium at locations that are not experimentally accessible
because of resolution limitations of the currently available imaging
technology, e.g. the calcium concentration within a few tens of
nanometers from the cytosolic mouth of a calcium channel.
Let us now assume that the first M < N buffer species are mobile
and the last N-M are immobile, i.e., have vanishing diffusion coefficients: Di = 0 µm2/sec for i = M + 1, ... , N. In
steady-state, all of the time derivatives in Equation 4 are zero,
giving rise to 0 = ki · yN+1 · ([Bi]T
yi)
k
i
· yi, i = M + 1, ... , N, which reduces Equation 4 to:
|
(5)
|
Equation 5, however, is exactly the system one has if there were
only the first M buffers, i.e., the mobile buffers, present in the
cell. The conclusion is in studying the steady-state concentrations, all the fixed buffers can be neglected because they do not influence these concentration profiles (Stern, 1992
). The effect of the immobile
buffers is to prolong the time needed to reach steady-state, but once
this is achieved, the standing gradients are completely identical to
those one would see if there were no fixed buffers present at all. The
reason for this is simply the fact that the fixed buffers cannot be
replenished by means of diffusion and, hence, get saturated. Because of
this, without loss of generality, we may assume that only mobile
buffers are present whenever we look at steady-state profiles.
II. The reaction-diffusion system can be
linearized if the "buffer saturations," i.e., the increase in the
concentrations of calcium-bound buffers on channel opening, are
small. Let us now come back to the general system (Eq. 4) to
establish the conditions under which a linearization can be carried
out. The reaction-diffusion system is nonlinear because of the
products of the concentrations according to the law of mass action. If we denote the resting concentrations by
= (
1, ... ,
N+1)t, any deviations from the
resting concentrations, say by virtue of calcium injection through an
open channel, can be written as: yi =
i +
yi,
i = 1, ... , N, i.e., y =
y +
, which suggests linearization of Equation 4 around
. We can write Equation 4 as a vector field
equation:
|
(6)
|
where the reaction vector field f(y)
incorporates all the nonlinearity and is given by:
D is just the diagonal matrix of the diffusion
coefficients:
The concentration increases (above resting values) of the
calcium-bound buffers, so-called "buffer saturations," are maximal in steady-state, at any point in space. Hence, if they are small in
steady-state, they can only be smaller during the transient evolution
of the gradients. For small saturations, we can approximate the
nonlinear contribution of the reactions to the evolution of the
gradients with linear expressions. This is exactly like approximating an exponential function of time, say with a time constant
, with a
linear function. Such an approximation will be quite good if we confine
ourselves to a time window of length
. The linear function must be
chosen to have the same slope as the slope of the exponential at the
point where the two curves overlap. Hence, we need to compute the
derivative of the reaction term f(y) in the system
(Eq. 6), which is accomplished by standard Taylor series expansion of
f. As a result, the nonlinear term f(y)
in (Eq. 6) is substituted by a linear matrix product A ·
y giving:
|
(7)
|
which is a simple linear matrix partial differential equation.
A is here the matrix of partial derivatives of f
evaluated at the resting point
, given by:
|
(8)
|
with
i = 1/(k
i + ki[Ca2+])
being the reaction time constant for binding of calcium to the buffer
Bi (Bernasconi, 1976
) and
i the "binding
ratio" of Bi defined as
i
(
[CaBi]/
[Ca2+]) = ([Bi]T · Ki/([Ca2+] + Ki)2) (Zhou and Neher, 1993
).
But what conclusions can we draw from the linearized system (Eq. 7)?
III. The steady-state solution to the linearized
reaction-diffusion problem is determined purely by three factors: the mean reaction times of the buffers with calcium
(
i), the buffering power of each buffer species
(
i), and the mobility of the buffers (Di). The solution is given by a sum of
exponentials divided by the distance from the channel. Every buffer can
be assigned a characteristic length-constant, which is indicative of
its kinetically limited buffering capability close to the channel.
The structure of the system (Eq. 7) and the matrix A already
show the determinants of the linearized problem, the diffusive mobility
of the buffers, and their binding kinetics. If a buffer is very mobile,
i.e., has a very high diffusion coefficient, then only its kinetics should govern its influence on the calcium signal. The more buffer one
has, the higher the chance of a calcium ion to be bound by the buffer
and thus the shorter the mean time that elapses until a calcium ion is
captured by a buffer molecule. This intuitive notion is expressed in
the ratio
i/
i. The binding ratio
i is a measure of the capacity of a buffer to bind
calcium at a given concentration
[Ca2+]. For instance,
= 100 means that ~1% of a given calcium load will appear as free calcium
and 99% will be bound by the buffer.
i/
i can easily be shown to be
equal to [Bi] · ki, a quantity that we refer to as the
"buffer product" and is the reciprocal mean time required for a
calcium ion to be bound by Bi.
Before proceeding with these lines of thought, however, let us outline
how the system (Eq. 7) can be solved to get analytical solutions.
Because we are interested in the concentration profiles within a very
small area, i.e., within the microdomain of a channel, we can consider
the channel mouth to be embedded in a hemisphere and in doing so reduce
the 3-D problem to a 1-D radial diffusion problem. Transformation of
the system (Eq. 7) to spherical coordinates gives us:
|
(9)
|
where r now represents the distance from the channel
mouth.
Finally, bringing our calcium source, i.e., the open channel, into
play, we put it at the origin given by r = 0 and assume that it has a constant flux
(in mol/sec) of calcium ions and represents no sources or sinks for other buffers. Appendix II outlines
the derivation of the transient solution to the system (Eq. 9) as a
function of time after channel opening and distance from channel.
There, we also demonstrate numerically that the transient solution
rapidly approaches steady-state within a few hundred nanometers from
the channel. For this reason, we will focus only on the steady-state
gradients in the following sections.
Within the microdomain of the channel, calcium is carried either as
calcium-bound form of one of the buffers or in its ionic free form, and
the total flux of calcium at each distance r from the origin
must be constant and equal to
at steady-state. Thus, we have the
following calcium flux conservation constraint:
|
(10)
|
where each term in the sum is just the contribution of each
calcium-carrying species to the total calcium flux
. So, we need to
solve (Eq. 9) in steady-state subject to the constraint given by
Equation 10. This is outlined in Appendix I. The main conclusion that
can be drawn is that the gradients around the channel can be described
as a sum of exponentials multiplied by 1/r according to:
|
(11)
|
The vectors ui as well as the length-constants of the
exponentials, 1/
, are determined by the
matrices A and D, hence by buffer kinetics
i, buffer binding power
i, and buffer diffusivity Di. Our objective in the
next sections will be to investigate the behavior of this solution
under different conditions and for different distances from the
channel.
IV. For distances from the channel that are
big compared with the length-constants, i.e., if the mean diffusion
time for calcium is much bigger than the mean reaction times of the
buffers, the steady-state concentrations are determined purely by
equilibrium buffer properties, namely the binding ratios
(
i) and the diffusion coefficients
(Di). A calcium ion, in the absence
of any buffers, will on average need a time t to diffuse a
distance r from the channel, which is proportional to
r2/DCa, i.e., t
r2/DCa. Hence, as one moves
away from the channel, the mean diffusion time eventually gets much
bigger than the mean buffer reaction times
i. For such
distances, one would expect that the buffers would be in chemical
equilibrium with local calcium. As a consequence, the binding kinetics
of a buffer should not affect the concentration profiles but its
calcium affinity and concentrations should.
To see that our solution (Eq. 11) confirms this prediction, we evaluate
it for long distances, i.e., for r
1, i = 1, ... , N. Then, the first N
terms in Equation 11 vanish, and
y is approximately given
by
y
(1/r)aN+1
uN+1. Equation 10 finally results in an
expression for aN+1 as (see Appendix I for the
definition of uN+1):
|
(12)
|
This confirms our intuition that the concentrations are
determined merely by equilibrium properties if we are at distances that
are bigger than the length-constants. In particular,
[Ca2+]
[
/4
r(
i=1N
iDi + DCa)]. Thus, the increase in the
concentration of free calcium scales linearly with the single channel
current
and falls according to a 1/r-law with an
apparent calcium diffusion coefficient given by
Dapp =
i=1N
iDi + DCa.
V. For distances from the channel that are short
compared with the length-constants, i.e., if the mean diffusion time
for calcium is much shorter than the mean reaction times of the
buffers, the calcium concentration behaves like in the unbuffered
scenario. We have just demonstrated that buffer kinetics is
insignificant far away from the channel. We shall now proceed to show
that very close to the channel, no buffer is capable of shaping the
calcium concentration profile because of its finite reaction time. In Appendix I, we calculate the increase in the concentration of free
calcium,
[Ca2+], as the difference between the
expected calcium increase in the absence of any buffers
(
/4
rDN+1) and the scaled sum of the
concentrations of calcium-bound buffers above rest
(
j=1N
Dj/DN+1
[CaBj]). Approaching the channel, the first term grows
with 1/r, whereas the sum is finite (because
[CaBj] < [Bj]T). Thus, sufficiently close to the channel, the first term will dominate such that calcium is approximated by
/4
rDN+1. It can be shown that this happens
for r
rmin
min
1/
. This describes the behavior of calcium
close to the channel. The next issue is the near-channel behavior of
the buffers. Clearly, the buffer saturations can only be finite because
the total buffer concentration is finite. But what determines the
saturation level of a buffer?
VI. The maximal buffer saturations depend
heavily on the kinetics of interaction of calcium with the buffers. The
faster a buffer, the higher its chance to bind calcium close to the
channel and the bigger its saturation. This saturation scales linearly with the single channel current and can be calculated explicitly to
check the validity of the small saturation assumption. We have
mentioned that our approach is based on the assumption of small buffer
saturations. Hence, one needs to be able to check the validity of this
assumption before applying the theory. This in turn raises the question
of whether it is possible to estimate the degree of buffer saturation,
given the experimental conditions such as single channel current and
buffer characteristics. Because the concentration deflections from rest
are maximal in steady-state and the higher, the closer we are to the
source, the limit for r
0 gives us an upper bound for
the maximal expected buffer saturations. For this sake, let
x = (
y1(0)
y2(0) ·
yN(0))t denote the vector of buffer
saturations at the source. Then, using Equation AI.10, one arrives at
the following identity:
|
(13)
|
Thus, the buffer saturations can be calculated analytically as the
solution to the above linear algebraic system of equations. It can be
shown that the buffer saturations can also be calculated according
to:
|
(14)
|
In other words, we compute the (positive) square root of
B, perform the matrix product 
· u, and the j-th component of this vector gives the
concentration deflection from rest of the calcium-bound form of the
j-th buffer at the source in steady-state.
To develop an intuitive understanding of the parameters that determine
the maximal buffer saturation, it is instructive to calculate the
saturation for the case of one buffer. Then, the matrix B
has the eigenvalues µ1 = 1/
1D1 +
1/
1DCa,
µ2 = 0. Using Equation 14, we arrive at:
|
(15)
|
Hence, the buffer saturation at the source is a product of three
factors: one involves only equilibrium buffer properties,
1/4
(
1D1 + DCa); the other,
, is
just the inverse length-constant of the buffer proportional to the kinetic term 1/
; and the last factor is just
the single channel flux
. Consequently, the following conditions lead to large saturations: large current, short buffer length-constant (fast kinetics), and low diffusion coefficient. Comparison with Equation 12 also reveals that the buffer saturation at the source is
identical with the expression for the buffer concentration deflections
for long distances from channel, evaluated at r = 1/
.
Because our approach is based on the small saturation assumption
and the buffer saturation is maximal at the source, Equation 13 can be
used to check, as a sufficient condition for the validity of the
method, whether the expected saturation is indeed going to be
small.
VII. For distances from the channel that are
comparable with the length-constants, the action of the buffers is to
produce a "relay race diffusion": a buffer takes calcium from one
with a shorter length-constant and hands it over to one with the longer length-constant. So far, in sections IV-VI, we have investigated the behavior of the steady-state gradients for distances much longer or
shorter than the characteristic buffer length-constants and developed a
formalism that allows us to check for the buffer saturations, and hence
the applicability of our approach. In this section, the objective is to
look at distances from channel, which are of the same order of
magnitude as the buffer length-constants, and explore the main
properties of our linearized solution to reveal some insights into what
the characteristic buffering length means. This is best demonstrated by
studying the fluxes of different calcium-carrying species. We choose to
illustrate the general principles for buffer conditions that match
whole-cell recording situations in bovine chromaffin cells in the
sequel.
We assume the presence of 0.5 mM of a fast, slowly mobile
endogenous buffer (Zhou and Neher, 1993
) as well as 2 mM
ATP in the cell. Figure
1A illustrates the
differential effect of the successive addition of different buffers. We
have plotted
[Ca2+] · r
(computed according to Equation AI.10) over the distance r
to eliminate the "1/r-law" and show the pure buffer
effect. Starting with 2 mM ATP as the only buffer, one sees
that it is buffering even at distances within nanometers of the channel
in accordance with its length-constant of 10 nm (topmost
curve in Fig. 1A). The addition of 0.5 mM of a low-affinity, poorly mobile, fast endogenous
calcium buffer shows up in the range between 20 and 200 nm and is of
rather small amplitude. With this buffer background, we then add either
2 mM EGTA or 2 mM BAPTA (Table
1). Note that both buffers have very
similar binding ratios (4600 and 4300, respectively) and thus give rise
to similar concentration deflections for large distances from the
source according to Equation 12. Under the specified conditions, the
length-constant for EGTA is 419 nm and for BAPTA 28 nm. In the case of
BAPTA, the buffering is completely dominated by BAPTA above 30 nm,
giving rise to steep gradients. In the case of EGTA, one clearly sees
the multiphasic decay: under 100 nm, ATP and the endogenous buffer are
doing the job, whereas EGTA produces only small, almost linear
gradients between 100 and 400 nm. At very small distances, i.e., within nanometers of the channel which is below all the length-constants, none
of the buffers can act significantly and all curves overlap and
approach
/4
DCa. To demonstrate the
relative contribution of the different buffers in the above system, we
have plotted the individual fluxes of all calcium-carrying species in
Figure 1B. They were calculated using the explicit
representation of Equation AI.10 together with Equation 10 and can
easily be seen to be given by (
i: flux of the i-th
species, i = 1, ... , N + 1):
|
(16)
|
The total flux corresponds to 3.1 × 106
calcium ions/sec and is spatially constant. Initially, ATP carries
calcium away from the source and has almost 42% of the calcium flux
(1.3 × 106 ions/sec) at 50 nm. As one moves
away from the source, the calcium ions are progressively taken over by
the endogenous buffer, which has its maximal flux between 200 and 300 nm. In accordance with its large length-constant, EGTA slowly takes
over most of the calcium load, corresponding to its big binding ratio.
This differential buffering within distances in the range of the
length-constants is a kinetic effect. Equilibrium considerations here
are inadequate. On the other hand, as seen in Equation 12, for
distances larger than 2 µm, the relative fluxes are governed purely
by the relative binding ratios and diffusion coefficients. To further
illustrate the kinetic notion of buffer length-constant, we have
calculated the spatial changes of the individual buffer fluxes, i.e.,
the spatial derivative of the fluxes, which is given by the simple expression:
|
(17)
|
Figure 1C plots these flux changes, normalized to the
respective peak changes, as a function of distance from the channel. In
the case of calcium, the absolute value of the flux changes is plotted
to get positive values. As one would expect intuitively, the individual
curves for the buffers peak at the length-constants of the buffers.
This clarifies another interpretation of the notion of length-constant:
it is the point in space where a buffer maximally changes its
contribution to carrying calcium. The widths of the curves also
correlate with the length-constants: the smaller the latter, the faster
the changes and the smaller the half-maximal widths. The changes in the
flux of free calcium, of course, are maximal in absolute value where
the first buffer, i.e., the one with the shortest length-constant,
maximally changes its flux. Thus, the free calcium curve peaks with the
ATP curve. In a sense, these spatial flux changes constitute a
"spectroscopy of the buffered diffusion problem": as we move away
from the source, by looking at the buffer flux changes we get a unique
fingerprint of the individual buffers present (and their contribution
to chelating calcium close to the channel) because they appear, one
after the other, as individual peaks in the flux changes.
Fig. 1.
Effect of multiple buffers and their contribution
to the flux of calcium. In A, starting with 2 mM ATP
(top trace), different buffers are added successively, and
their range of buffering is visualized by plotting
[Ca2+] · r (calculated using
Eq. AI.10) over r to eliminate the
"1/r-dependence" of the calcium concentration
deflections. In the absence of EGTA or BAPTA, the ATP kinetics is
showing up between 10 and 50 nm from the channel, whereas the
endogenous buffer shows up in the range of 50-200 nm. For larger
distances, the equilibrium buffer properties according to Equation 12
determine the concentration of calcium. Although EGTA and BAPTA have
similar binding ratios and hence equilibrium buffering powers, EGTA is kinetically limited in buffering
within 100 nm compared with BAPTA because of its on-rate, which is two
orders of magnitude smaller than the on-rate of BAPTA. In B,
the contributions to calcium flux of the individual calcium-carrying
species are plotted as a function of distance for the case of 2 mM ATP, 0.5 mM endogenous buffer, and 2 mM EGTA. The total flux corresponds to 3.1 × 106 ions/sec. Depending on its length-constant,
there is a well defined range within which each buffer is maximally
exerting its kinetically limited buffering action. ATP, for instance,
has a binding ratio of only 0.9. Nevertheless, it captures >40% of
the calcium ions within 30-200 nm. Farther away from the source, the
calcium is "handed over" to the endogenous buffer and then to EGTA.
At large distances from the channel, 99.9% of the total flux is
carried by EGTA. C plots the spatial changes of the fluxes (given in
B), normalized to their peak values according to Equation 17; for Ca2+, the absolute value of the flux changes
is plotted. The curves peak at the corresponding buffer
length-constants, demonstrating the intuitive notion that the
length-constants are points at which maximal changes of fluxes are
occurring. In this way, one gets a fingerprint of the present buffers,
indicating their range of kinetic action.
[View Larger Version of this Image (28K GIF file)]
VIII. Application: a single calcium channel cannot
control release of neurotransmitters at the calycal synapse in the
MNTB. Finally, as an application, we now want to demonstrate how
these theoretical considerations can be used to draw conclusions about the nature of transmitter release at a fast central synapse, namely the
calyx of Held. The issue we examine is the question of whether the
opening of a single calcium channel is sufficient to trigger phasic
transmitter release. Because this spatial and temporal domain is not
accessible to direct measurements, one needs to indirectly interfere
with the transmission process to reveal some of its properties. For the
calyx-type synapse in the rat medial nucleus of the trapezoid body,
Borst and Sakmann (1996)
have performed kinetic competition experiments
by dialyzing the terminal with different concentrations of fast and
slow exogenous calcium buffers of similar affinities, namely BAPTA and
EGTA. They have observed the extent to which these buffers are able to
compete with the endogenous calcium sensor that triggers rapid release
and reduce transmission by reducing the free calcium concentration at
the sensor. Their basic observation is that 10 mM EGTA is
as potent in blocking synaptic transmission in these terminals as 1 mM BAPTA. We will conclude that no reasonable position for
a release site can be found, which within the framework of our model
would predict such a result.
Assuming a power law between the free calcium concentration and
transmitter release, the result of Borst and Sakmann (1996)
implies
that the secretion apparatus is located at a mean distance from the
channel in which both chelators can give rise to similar calcium
concentrations, if a single calcium channel would be able to control
release by virtue of its proximity to the calcium sensor in the
microdomain. Thus, we have searched for a location, i.e., a distance
from the calcium channel, in our model where similar calcium
concentrations are present with 1 mM BAPTA or 10 mM EGTA. This position was found to be >1.1 µm away from
the channel where the calcium concentration was <20 nM
above resting values, even with single channel currents as high as 10 pA. Studies of fast synapses, like the bipolar terminals of the retina
(Heidelberger et al., 1994
), demonstrate that the calcium sensor for
triggering release has a rather low affinity in the micromolar range.
In neuroendocrine chromaffin cells, the threshold for activating secretion is ~500 nM (Augustine and Neher, 1992a
). In
addition, if 20 nM free calcium concentration above rest
could trigger fast release, the cell would need to control calcium with
the precision of a few, which seems to be impossible. Because these
calcium concentrations cannot be responsible for fast release, the
small buffer saturation regimen cannot provide a scenario for secretion in these terminals. Hence, the microdomain of a single channel cannot
govern the release process unless we face significant buffer saturation
on channel opening in the microdomain. The latter, in turn, is only
possible with single channel currents much above 50 pA, which is a
completely unreasonable proposition. Thus, a single calcium channel
cannot by itself control release at a nearby release site (by virtue of
close proximity between the channel mouth and the calcium sensor) in
these terminals, arguing against microdomain-dominated release. Only
clusters of channels can contribute to the buildup of high enough
calcium concentration domains to trigger the transmission. Once
clusters of channels produce sufficiently high calcium concentrations,
BAPTA gets locally saturated because of its short length-constant (as
we saw before), whereas EGTA is much less saturated. Eventually, this
BAPTA saturation depletes it to an extent that EGTA and BAPTA can exert
the same influence on secretion. With increasing source strength, the
main advantage of BAPTA over EGTA in buffering calcium close to the
source, namely its fast kinetics, loses importance, because buffer
saturation leads to a point at which availability of free buffer is the
limiting factor (for instance, in the limiting case of 100%
saturation, BAPTA cannot buffer at all). Then, the binding ratio (
)
is the critical determinant of free buffer availability, and thus
equilibrium considerations and buffer properties dominate the buffered
diffusion (see also discussion of the "rapid buffer approximation"
in the next section). Note that under the conditions of the above
experiments, the exogenous binding ratio is so high (2100 and 22,000, respectively) that the buffer length-constant is determined purely by
/(
· DCa), which is equal to
[B] · kon/DCa,
the buffer product divided by DCa (see
definition of µ1 in VI). Consequently, the effect of two
buffers can be compared by multiplying the free buffer concentrations
with the on-rates to obtain the buffer products as good estimates of
the length-constants.
DISCUSSION
There is an ongoing discussion regarding the spatial relation
between presynaptic calcium channels and the secretion apparatus at
synapses and its impact on the free calcium concentration at the
calcium sensor responsible for triggering exocytosis. It is debated
whether secretion is triggered by the opening of a single calcium
channel, which is somehow associated with its prefusion complex, or
whether the simultaneous action of many calcium channels leads to a
sufficiently high calcium level to trigger exocytosis (Roberts et al.,
1990
; Augustine et al., 1991
; Stanley, 1993
; Llinas et al., 1995
). The
first scenario, the "single channel domain," is supported by recent
findings indicating molecular interactions of calcium channels with
components of the famous SNARE-complex (Bennett et al., 1992
; Rettig et
al., 1996
; Sheng et al., 1996
). The other scenario, the "domain
overlap regimen," is suggested by experiments showing that even slow
buffers of EGTA type are capable of reducing synaptic transmission at
moderate concentrations (Borst and Sakmann, 1996
) or the existence of
synapses with low release probabilities but a high number of docked
vesicles (Rosenmund et al., 1993
). Unfortunately, in general, it is not possible to measure directly the free calcium concentration at the
relevant release sites. The solution to this problem has been to use
extensive numerical simulations of the buffered diffusion problem.
This paper outlines a linearization of the general reaction-diffusion
problem that is aimed at determining the parameters shaping the calcium
gradients close to a calcium channel in analytical and intuitive terms.
Our work is an extension of the results of Pape et al. (1995)
. It is a
submicroscopic theory that can only be usefully applied if we are
considering distances up to a few hundred nanometers from the calcium
source. The theory is specifically tailored for use in a temporal and
spatial domain that is not accessible to imaging, with the objective to
obviate time-consuming simulations of diffusion-reaction
equations.
Because standing gradients rapidly evolve close to a channel (Appendix
II), we focus on steady-state concentration profiles of calcium and
calcium-bound buffers. It is noted that fixed buffers do not affect the
steady gradients. This is because they cannot be replenished by
diffusion of free buffer. Other mechanisms affecting calcium signaling,
such as active transport of calcium ions, can only have little effect
within this range because it is impossible to achieve such a high
density of pumps and exchangers within a small area to counteract the
calcium influx within <1 msec. Hence, we can focus on the impact of
mobile buffers. The main feature of our approach is the assumption that
the saturation of the involved buffers, i.e., the incremental increase
in the concentration of calcium-bound buffers on channel opening, is small enough to permit a linearization of the problem. This is mostly
equivalent with sufficiently small single channel currents or
sufficiently high buffer concentrations. Note that we do not require
the increase in free calcium concentration to be small (which in
general is not the case as one approaches the source). The reason for
this freedom is the fact that we compute the free calcium concentration
as the difference between the totally expected calcium increase (in the
absence of any buffers) and the scaled sum of the calcium-bound buffer
concentrations (see Eq. AI.10). If this applies, one can deduce many
properties of our solution to the reaction-diffusion problem.
(1) The increase in [Ca2+] above resting values,
[Ca2+], as well as that of the calcium-bound
buffers, is proportional to the source strength given by the single
channel current.
(2) To each buffer present, one can assign a buffer
length-constant that is determined by equilibrium (dissociation
constant and total buffer concentration) and kinetic (on-rate for
calcium complexation) properties of the buffer as well as its
diffusional mobility. It mainly represents the average distance a
calcium ion will diffuse before it is captured by the buffer and the
average distance the buffer will diffuse until it gets into local
equilibrium with calcium.
(3) The shape of the gradients surrounding a channel is determined by a
multiexponential law (with rates given by the inverse length-constants)
superimposed on a "1/r-law," which one expects in the
absence of any buffers.
(4) For distances large compared with the length-constants, the
concentration deflections above resting values are determined purely by
equilibrium buffer properties, i.e., the on-rates of the buffers have
no influence on the concentrations, because there is enough time for
the reactions to reach chemical equilibrium.
(5) On the other side, for distances short compared with the
length-constants, the buffers are not able to bind calcium. This is
because calcium ions will diffuse to regions of lower
[Ca2+] within the time the buffers need on average
to bind calcium. As a consequence,
[Ca2+] will
behave as it does in the "no buffer regime," showing the pure
1/r dependence.
(6) The individual buffer saturations for a specified single channel
current and defined buffer conditions depend heavily on the individual
length-constants. The bigger the length-constants, the smaller the
buffer saturations. Maximal buffer saturations can be computed on the
basis of the buffer parameters to check in advance whether the theory
will be applicable.
(7) The solution to the problem can be written analytically in terms of
the buffer parameters. Numerical computations can be reduced to
standard eigenvalue problems involving spectral decomposition of
matrices. The latter can be done most effectively using existing
program packages and thus eliminates the need for expensive
discretizations of the involved differential equations.
(8) Finally, in case all diffusion coefficients are identical, the
temporal evolution of the gradients in the vicinity of an open channel
can be written as a convolution product of a purely reactive term and a
purely diffusive term, which permits effective computation of the time
courses.
If the main assumption is fulfilled, one can use the present approach
to estimate [Ca2+] at different distances from the
channel and explore the differential effect of buffers on synaptic
transmission. But when is the main assumption fulfilled? By tolerating,
say not more than 20% increase in [CaB], the following rule of thumb
can be stated: with 100 µM of an EGTA-type buffer, 4 pA
single channel current is allowed, and with 100 µM of a
BAPTA-type buffer, 0.3 pA calcium current is allowed. It should be
noted, however, that these are really conservative estimates. From
simulations of reaction kinetics and comparison of the linearized
solution with the full numerical solution (not shown here), we actually
expect the linear approximation to be valid over a much wider range of
buffer saturations, and, of course, as the concentration of mobile
buffers increases, higher single channel currents are tolerable.
An alternative approach to the problem of understanding the steady
gradients surrounding a channel is the "rapid buffer approximation (RBA)" (Smith et al., 1996
). Here, one assumes that the buffers are
so fast that they are in chemical equilibrium at every point in time
and space. In other words, if the calcium gradient is given by an
exponential with a length-constant L and the reaction time
constant of the buffer is
, then one requires
L2/(2DCa). This simplifies
the general reaction-diffusion system to one nonlinear partial
differential equation. It has its own merits if one is not facing sharp
gradients. For instance, if we have 1 mM BAPTA, then
= 4 µ sec and L must be >150 nm for the validity of RBA;
however, close to the channel, i.e., between 10 and 150 nm,
[Ca2+] falls exponentially with the
length-constant of BAPTA, which is 30 nm. This implies that we cannot
apply RBA this close to the source. Figure
2 illustrates this point by comparing
directly the RBA solution according to Smith (1996)
with our solution. Clearly, RBA is underestimating [Ca2+] (and
overestimating [CaBAPTA]) because it assumes chemical equilibrium of
the reactions where, as we have seen, no equilibrium is attainable. On
the other hand, for long distances, our solution matches the RBA as is
visible in Figure 2 for r > 150 nm. Indeed, it can be shown that Equation 10 of Smith (1996)
is identical to our Equation 12.
Thus, our approach is valid for small saturation levels (or sharp
calcium gradients). On the other hand, if one is facing high single
channel calcium currents, which almost completely saturate the mobile
buffer over extended regions, RBA would be appropriate to explore the
microdomain properties.
Fig. 2.
Comparison of the steady-state rapid buffer
approximation with the linearized solution to the steady-state buffered
diffusion problem. A depicts [Ca2+] and
B [CaBAPTA] as a function of distance in the presence of 1 mM BAPTA with 150 fA single-channel current. The rapid
buffer approximation is calculated according to Equation 11 of Smith
(1996)
. Because chemical equilibrium is assumed everywhere in Smith's model, [Ca2+] is massively underestimated close to
a channel where no equilibrium can be reached. The linearized approach
explicitly accounts for kinetics and thus is void of this problem. The
problem is also reflected in B, where 1.8 µM
[Ca2+] saturates almost 90% of the buffer,
whereas we get only 10 µM maximal increase in [CaBAPTA]
(i.e., 1% of total BAPTA), close to the channel. The reason for this
shortcoming is the steep calcium gradient produced by BAPTA, with which
the rapid buffer assumption cannot cope, whereas the linear approach
holds with only 1% saturation. As expected, for distances larger than
the length-constant of BAPTA, the two curves converge.
[View Larger Version of this Image (22K GIF file)]
Finally, let us outline how one could handle channel clustering.
The source in our considerations so far has been a point source of
calcium. Nevertheless, there is evidence that in some systems, tens or
hundreds of calcium channels can be clustered (Tucker and Fettiplace,
1995
). We cannot treat them as a single channel and accordingly scale
up the single channel current because we would then ignore the spatial
arrangement of the channels. Fortunately, the linearized scheme has an
intrinsic feature that still allows us to cope with these
circumstances, namely the well known superposition principle. We can
compute calcium and buffer concentrations in response to the opening of
a single channel in the cluster and then consider a specific spatial
arrangement of an array of channels and sum up the individual
concentration deflections by virtue of one channel opening to get the
profiles in response to the activation of the whole channel cluster.
This would allow us to rescue our intuition within this model to
complicated channel arrangements without any need to discretize
differential equations.
FOOTNOTES
Received March 25, 1997; revised June 26, 1997; accepted June 30, 1997.
We thank Dr. Christian Rosenmund for helpful comments on this
manuscript.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Erwin Neher, Department of
Membrane Biophysics, Max-Planck-Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Am
Fassberg 11, D-37070 Göttingen, Germany.
APPENDIX I
In this section, we solve the system (Eq. 9) in steady-state,
subject to the condition (Eq. 10) to derive an analytical solution for
the standing gradients surrounding an open calcium channel in its
microdomain. Equation 9 in steady-state, i.e., with
y = 0, can be written as:
|
(AI.1)
|
This is a system of ordinary differential equations that can
easily be simplified by the transformation
z
r
·
y to give:
|
(AI.2)
|
a linear second-order system with constant coefficients given by
B = (bij)i,j=1N+1.
Furthermore, integrating Equation 10 from r to
and
realizing that at infinity, the concentration deflections above resting