The Journal of Neuroscience, August 6, 2003, 23(18):7183-7193
Previous Article | Next Article 
Cytosolic Prion Protein in Neurons
Alexander Mironov, Jr,1
Diane Latawiec,2
Holger Wille,2,3
Essia Bouzamondo-Bernstein,2,4
Giuseppe Legname,2,3
R. Anthony Williamson,6
Dennis Burton,6
Stephen J. DeArmond,2,4
Stanley B. Prusiner,2,3,5 and
Peter J. Peters1
1The Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2Institute for
Neurodegenerative Diseases, Departments of 3Neurology,
4Pathology and 5Biochemistry
and Biophysics, University of California, San Francisco, California 94143, and
6Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, California
92037
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Localizing the cellular prion protein (PrPC) in the brain is
necessary for understanding the pathogenesis of prion diseases. However, the
precise ultrastructural localization of PrPC still remains
enigmatic. We performed the first quantitative study of the ultrastructural
localization of PrPC in the mouse hippocampus using high-resolution
cryoimmunogold electron microscopy. PrPC follows the standard
biosynthetic trafficking pathway with a preferential localization in late
endosomal compartments and on the plasma membrane of neurons and neuronal
processes. PrPC is found with the same frequency within the
synaptic specialization and perisynaptically, but is almost completely
excluded from synaptic vesicles. Unexpectedly, PrP is also found in the
cytosol in subpopulations of neurons in the hippocampus, neocortex, and
thalamus but not the cerebellum. Cytosolic PrP may have altered susceptibility
to aggregation, suggesting that these neurons might play a significant role in
the pathogenesis of prion diseases, in particular those mammals harboring
mutant PrP genes.
Key words: prion protein; hippocampus; immunogold; localization; membrane; cytosolic
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
The cellular prion protein (PrPC) is a cell-surface glycoprotein
anchored by a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) moiety
(Stahl et al., 1987
).
PrPC is expressed throughout the brain, particularly in neurons
(Kretzschmar et al., 1986
;
Moser et al., 1995
) and to a
lesser extent in extraneural tissues
(Bendheim et al., 1992
;
Ford et al., 2002
). In prion
diseases, PrPC is converted to an abnormal, conformationally
altered isoform (PrPSc), which subsequently accumulates in the
brain and results in extensive neurodegeneration with an inevitably fatal
outcome (Prusiner, 1996
).
Therefore, localizing PrPC in the brain is an important step in
understanding the biology of the normal protein and mapping changes in models
of experimental prion diseases.
The precise localization of PrPC remains enigmatic because of
conflicting data obtained using different techniques. Immunohistochemical
studies described a somatic expression of PrPC in neurons with no
signal or only a minor signal in the neuropil
(DeArmond et al., 1987
;
Piccardo et al., 1990
;
Safar et al., 1990
;
Bendheim et al., 1992
;
Verghese-Nikolakaki et al.,
1999
; Ford et al.,
2002
). However, it was not determined whether PrPC was
luminal [for example, in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) or Golgi] or
cytosolic. Data obtained using free-floating section immunohistochemistry
(Sales et al., 1998
;
Haeberle et al., 2000
;
Moya et al., 2000
) and
immunoelectron microscopy (Fournier et al.,
1995
,
2000
) indicated
PrPC localization in the neuropil with a synaptic membrane
prevalence. However, data obtained from synaptosomal preparations
(Herms et al., 1999
) and a
recent ultrastructural study on the distribution of PrPC in the
cerebellum (Laine et al.,
2001
) have favored a predominantly plasma membrane location of
PrPC with no expression on synaptic vesicles or in the cytoplasm.
These contradictory findings probably reflect the peculiarities inherently
associated with pre-embedding techniques. Many immunoelectron microscopic
procedures may result in a destruction of cellular membranes, possibly leading
to an artificial redistribution of GPI-anchored proteins within the membrane
(Griffiths, 1993
).
Two recently published studies on the effects of proteosome inhibitors on
PrPC degradation and expression of cytosolic PrP suggested that
cytosolic localization of PrP is sufficient to induce neurodegeneration
(Ma and Lindquist, 2002
;
Ma et al., 2002
). It is
notable that under the experimental conditions of these studies, PrP becomes
insoluble and acquires partial protease resistance.
These uncertainties regarding the precise subcellular localization of
PrPC therefore encouraged us to perform the first quantitative
study of ultrastructural PrPC localization in the mouse brain. We
used a sensitive, high-resolution detection method combining immunofluoresence
and immunogold labeling of 500 and 60 nm cryosections at light and electron
microscopy levels, respectively. The method uses glutaraldehyde for both
optimal fixation and preventing migration of GPI-anchored proteins and
circumvents the need for alcohol dehydration. Because of its potentially
important role in the pathogenesis of prion diseases
(DeArmond et al., 1987
;
Taraboulos et al., 1992a
), we
focused on the localization of PrPC in the hippocampus and show for
the first time quantitative data of PrPC distribution at the
ultrastructural level throughout the CA1 and dentate gyrus areas. We localized
PrPC on all biosynthetic and endocytic transport membranous
structures of hippocampal neurons, but almost no PrPC was found in
synaptic vesicles. In addition, we discovered a subset of neurons in which PrP
is located predominantly in the cytosol. These cells did not show any obvious
signs of neurodegeneration but may have important implications in the
pathogenesis of prion diseases.
 |
Materials and Methods
|
|---|
Animals and preparation of tissue. Brain tissue was obtained from
22 mice at
12 weeks of age from four different mouse lines with the FVB
background: (1) wild-type (wt) mice, (2) PrP-ablated
(Prnp0/0) mice
(Büeler et al., 1993
), (3)
transgenic 4053 mice overexpressing mouse PrPC
(Telling et al., 1996
), and
(4) transgenic 3045 mice overexpressing hamster PrPC
(Telling et al., 1996
).
According to PHS-NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals, the mice were deeply anesthetized with Nembutal and perfused
transcardially, first with PBS plus heparin (1 µl/ml) for 90 sec, then with
PBS for 1 min, and finally with one of the following fixatives for 5 min: 2%
paraformaldehyde (PFA) in PIPES-HEPES-EGTA-magnesium (PHEM) buffer (25
mM HEPES, 10 mM EGTA, 60 mM PIPES, 2
mM MgCl2, pH 7.2) (four B4053 mice); 2% PFA-0.2%
glutaraldehyde (GA) in PHEM buffer, pH 7.2 (four B4053 mice, four wt mice, two
A3045 mice, two Prnp0/0 mice);
periodate-lysine-paraformaldehyde (PLP) fixative
(McLean and Nakane, 1974
) with
a final concentration of 2% PFA (four B4053 mice); and 2% PFA-0.2% GA in PHEM
buffer, pH 7.2 (two B4053 mice). After perfusion, the brains were collected,
postfixed in the same fixative for 1 hr at 4°C, washed in PHEM four times,
and stored at 4°C in 0.5% PFA in PHEM buffer, pH 7.2.
Reagents and antibodies. PrP-specific recombinant antibody
fragments (Fabs) D13, D18, R1, R2, E123, and E149 were derived from phage
libraries and have been characterized thoroughly
(Peretz et al., 1997
;
Williamson et al., 1998
;
Leclerc et al., 2001
;
Peretz et al., 2001
). SAF32
and 8H4 monoclonal antibodies were gifts from Dr. H. Axelrad (Faculty of
Medicine, Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France). An aliquot of
Fab D18 was conjugated to UltraSmall gold particles (0.8 nm; Aurion,
Wageningen, The Netherlands) to allow increased penetration into the
cryosections and circumvent labeling artifacts caused by a cross-reaction with
immuno-globulins in the tissue. R-GENT SE-EM and R-GENT SE-LM silver
enhancement kits were purchased from Aurion. The in situ cell death
detection kit [terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated biotinylated UTP
nick end labeling (TUNEL)] was purchased from Roche Products (Mannheim,
Germany).
Polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies against GABA, monoclonal antibodies
against parvalbumin, and monoclonal 2',3'-cyclic nucleotide
3'-phosphodiesterase (CNPase) antibodies were obtained from Sigma (St.
Louis, MO). Polyclonal antibodies against parvalbumin, calretinin, and
calbindin D28K were obtained from Swant (Bellinzona, Switzerland). Polyclonal
antibodies against somatostatin and b-NOS were purchased from Chemicon
(Temecula, CA), and monoclonal antibodies against
synaptobrevin/vesicle-associated membrane protein-2 (Vamp2) were purchased
from Synaptic Systems (Göttingen, Germany). Polyclonal GFAP and S100
antibodies were purchased from Dako (Glostrup, Denmark), goat polyclonal Thy-1
(GPI-anchored protein) antibodies and rabbit polyclonal antibodies against
neuropeptide Y were obtained from Research Diagnostics (Flanders, NJ), and
polyclonal antibodies against vasointestinal peptide were purchased from
DiaSorin (Antony, France). Rabbit anti-mouse Fab and rabbit anti-mouse IgG
antibodies were obtained from Pierce (Rockford, IL). Secondary anti-mouse,
anti-rabbit antibodies conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 or Texas Red were
purchased from Molecular Probes (Eugene, OR). Protein-A-gold conjugates were
obtained from Utrecht Medical School (The Netherlands).
Cryosectioning and immunolabeling. Cryosections were prepared as
described previously (Peters,
2001
). Briefly, the fixed specimens were infused with 2.3
M sucrose overnight and then frozen in liquid nitrogen. Both
semithin (0.5 µm) and ultrathin sections (60 nm) were cut at -100 or
-120°C with a diamond knife on a Leica (Vienna, Austria) Ultracut T
equipped with a cryoattachment. Semithin sections were picked up from the
diamond knife using 2.3 M sucrose and transferred to a glass slide
for subsequent immunohistochemical labeling. For light microscopy, primary
antibodies were detected using either secondary antibodies conjugated with
Alexa Fluor 488 or Texas Red or secondary rabbit "bridging"
antibodies with protein A-gold (5 nm), which was silver-enhanced with Aurion
R-GENT SE-LM kit for 15 min. Ultrathin sections were picked up from the
diamond knife with a 1% methyl cellulose 25CP-1.15 M sucrose
solution and transferred to formvar/carbon-coated copper grids.
The immunolabeling of sections was done as described previously
(Raposo et al., 1997
). In
brief, after blocking with 1% cold fish gelatin and 1% bovine serum albumin
for 15 min, sections were incubated with primary antibody for 60 min, washed,
and bridging rabbit antibodies were applied for 30 min when necessary.
Sections were then incubated with protein A-gold (10 nm) for 20 min. For the
double-labeling experiments, a second primary antibody followed by protein
A-gold was applied consecutively after labeling with the first antibody. To
rule out the possibility that noncolocalization could be attributable to
interference by the primary antibody, we compared the density of immunogold
labeling of each antibody in single-immunolabeling procedures or omitted one
of the primary antibodies in double-labeling experiments. No significant
interference was observed. Fab D18 against PrPC covalently
conjugated with 0.8 nm UltraSmall gold particles was also used to label PrP.
Ultra-Small gold particles were visualized using the R-GENT SE-EM silver
enhancement kit, following the instructions of the manufacturer. Labeled
sections were viewed with a Philips CM10 electron microscope (FEI Company,
Eindhoven, The Netherlands) at 80 kV and a standard 15,000x
magnification.
Although cryoultramicrotomy uses a different contrast-staining method from
routine epon ultramicrotomy, cellular and subcellular profiles of cells appear
similar under the electron microscope
(Maunsbach and Afzelius,
1999
). The only differences are the reverse contrast of membranes,
which appear white, and the cytoplasm, which becomes electron dense. Cellular
and subcellular profiles were thus identified and defined according to the
criteria of Peters et al.
(1991
).
Quantification of immunogold labeling. Quantitative evaluation of
hippocampal labeling was performed only on ultrathin cryosections of wt FVB
mice that were fixed with 2% PFA-0.2% GA to avoid overexpression artifacts of
the transgenes. The relative distributions of labeled PrPC were
determined by counting gold particles over plasma and intracellular membranes
of selected hippocampal cells. We estimated the membrane (gold per micrometer)
and area (gold per square micrometer) labeling density on micrographs with a
final 32,000x magnification by using point and intersection counting
with a line and point lattice (10 mm distance) overlay as described by Weibel
(1979
) and Griffiths
(1993
). Gold particles located
20 nm from a visible membrane structure were assigned to that structure.
The distance of 20 nm was chosen on the basis of the distance constraints of
immunolabeling described below.
We used two labeling protocols on ultrathin cryosections. The first
included the application of a murine Fab fragment, followed by a rabbit
anti-mouse anti-Fab IgG and protein A coupled to a 10 nm gold particle.
According to Griffiths (1993
)
and Amit et al. (1986
), the
length of an IgG molecule in projection is
8 -10 nm, and a Fab fragment
is
5 nm. The diameter of the protein A-gold (10 nm) complex is
12-13
nm, but because we measure the distance to the center of the gold particle, we
should consider only its radius (6 -7 nm). In summary, the complex consisting
of a Fab, IgG, and protein A-gold has a projection of 19 -22 nm. Therefore, we
used a
20 nm radius to assign gold particles to a specific structure on
the sections.
The second labeling protocol involves the application of recombinant Fab
fragments directly conjugated with UltraSmall gold particles (0.8 nm) and the
subsequent silver enhancement for better visualization. In this case, the
distance between the antigen and the center of the gold particle is
6 nm.
The silver enhancement procedure deposits silver around the gold particle
without preferential orientation, practically isotropic. Therefore, the
position of the enhanced gold particle (10 -15 nm in diameter) will precisely
indicate the localization of the antigen of interest.
We analyzed cells taken from a vertical strip running through CA1 from the
stratum oriens to the hilus of the dentate gyrus. This included cells from the
pyramidal cell layer and hilus, as well as dentate granule cells. Ten random
pictures with good ultrastructural preservation were taken from each area on
sections from 18 grids made from three animal samples (six grids for each
sample). The gold particles were counted in the following subcellular
structures: endoplasmic reticulum (including the nuclear envelope), Golgi
complex, endosomes and lysosomes, tubules and vesicles without definite coat,
clathrin-coated vesicles and pits, plasma membrane, mitochondria, and nucleus.
Immunogold labeling on mitochondria was treated as background labeling,
because PrPC has never been observed on these organelles by either
biochemical or morphological methods by us or by others.
In addition, we analyzed the distribution of gold particles in the neuropil
of the strata radiatum, oriens, and moleculare of the dentate gyrus, on
membrane profiles in dendrites and axons, and on membranes of synaptic and
perisynaptic profiles. Each class was further subdivided into the plasma
membrane, internal transport vesicles, spines and endosomes (only for
dendrites), mitochondria, and myelin sheaths (only for axons). Membranes of
synaptic complexes were classified into synaptic vesicles, synaptic
specialization (which included the two closely opposed membranes in the
synapse), and the presynaptic and postsynaptic membrane (which include the
membranes outside the synaptic specialization region). For our cryosections,
we used the same standard criteria for subcellular structures in brain cells
as those used in epon sections (Peters et
al., 1991
). Unidentified membrane compartments were not taken into
account, because they did not show substantial labeling and represented only
5% of all cellular membranes.
To test that the labeling for PrP was not random, we calculated the
relative labeling index (RLI) according to Mayhew et al.
(2002
). By superimposing a
test-point lattice on the electron micrographs, we generated random points
(P) on cellular compartments with the point density determined by the
relative size of each compartment. The number of points was normalized to the
number of observed gold particles (no), giving a
value for the expected distribution of labels
(ne). The RLI is calculated by dividing
no by ne. Particle
distributions were compared with a
2 analysis to test whether
the observed distributions differ significantly from random distributions. The
partial
2 value in each row in
Table 4 was obtained using the
following formula: (no -
ne)2/ne.
The total
2 value was obtained by taking the sum of the
partial values. If a compartment is randomly labeled, its RLI = 1 and partial
2 = 0. If a compartment is preferentially labeled, the RLI
value will be >1, and its partial
2 value will contribute a
significant portion to the total
2 value.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 4. Observed and expected distributions of gold particles in compartments of
pyramidal neurons and CPrP cells, relative labeling index, and
2
valuesa
| |
 |
Results
|
|---|
Assessment of methodology and antibodies
Four different fixatives were examined to find the optimal conditions for
both ultrastructural integrity and preservation of antigenicity. We found that
both PLP and 2% PFA fixatives resulted in suboptimal ultrastructure
preservation for ultrathin cryosections (our unpublished data). A fixative
composed of both PFA and GA gave the best results for ultrastructural
integrity and antigen preservation. However, the distribution of
immunolabeling was the same with all fixatives used (data not shown). Thus, we
used the fixative containing 2% PFA and 0.2% GA for the immunolabeling
experiments.
Raising antibodies against PrP has been difficult because of the high
degree of conservation of PrP sequences between species and the inhibitory
activity of anti-PrP antibodies toward lymphocytes. To circumvent this
problem, we used well characterized recombinant Fabs that recognize different
parts of the PrPC molecule
(Peretz et al., 1997
;
Leclerc et al., 2001
): E123
(residues 23-37), E149 (residues 72-86), D13 (residues 96 -104), D18 (residues
133-157), and R1 and R2 (residues 225-231). These Fabs were obtained from
immunized Prnp0/0 mice and retrieved through phage display
libraries and have been shown as reliable immunoreagents that recognize
PrPC in different experimental procedures (Williamson et al.,
1996
,
1998
;
Leclerc et al., 2001
;
Peretz et al., 2001
).
Monoclonal antibodies 8H4 (which recognizes residues 158 -174) and SAF32
(which recognizes residues 52-92) were used as additional positive controls.
We found no differences in labeling patterns in the murine hippocampus between
these different antibodies (data not shown).
Distribution of PrPC observed by light microscopy
To determine the precise localization of PrPC, we used
cryoprotected aldehyde-fixed tissue samples, which allowed us to make both
semithin (0.5 µm) and ultrathin (60 nm) sections from the very same block
in a serial manner. Thus, we had the ability to easily correlate
immunolabeling at cellular and subcellular levels. We used two markers for
semithin cryosections: (1) gold particles that were silver enhanced
(Fig. 1A) and (2) a
fluorescent dye marker (Fig.
1C). Both methods clearly showed that PrPC was
found predominantly in the neuropil in all hippocampal layers, with a higher
density in the strata oriens and radiatum, moderate immunoreactivity in the
stratum lacunosum-moleculare, and weak labeling in the stratum moleculare and
hilus (Fig. 1A,C). No
significant differences in labeling intensity were observed among the CA1,
CA2, and CA3 areas of the hippocampus (data not shown). Dendrites of pyramidal
cells were mostly immunonegative inside the profile and seen as empty profiles
embedded in positive surroundings (Fig.
1A,C,D). This apparently reflected the membranous
localization of PrPC [see electron microscopy (EM) study below].
Specificity of the PrPC antibodies was confirmed by the absence of
staining in the hippocampus with the omission of primary antibody and tissue
from a Prnp0/0 mouse
(Fig. 1B).

View larger version (185K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Hippocampal (CA1 and dentate gyrus) semithin cryosections labeled for
PrPC with Fab D18. Labeling is concentrated in the stratum oriens
(o), stratum radiatum (r), and lacunosum-moleculare (lm); less labeling is
seen in the stratum moleculare (m) and hilus (h) of the dentate gyrus. Cell
bodies in pyramidal (p) and granule (g) layers are free of labeling, with the
exception of rare cells (D). A, Hippocampus of a wt FVB
mouse. Fab D18 was used with a secondary polyclonal antibody and protein
A-gold (5 nm) that was subsequently visualized by silver enhancement (Aurion).
B, Hippocampus of a Prnp0/0 mouse. Labeling is
the same as in A. No positive signal is visible. Sections are
counterstained with Giemsa. C, Hippocampus of a wt FVB mouse.
Fluorescent labeling shows a labeling pattern similar to A. The arrow
points to a cell with intense PrPC labeling. The box shows the cell
enlarged in D. D, A magnified view of a cell with high
PrPC content. E, Hippocampus (CA1 area) of a 4053 mouse
that overexpresses PrP, showing a pattern of PrPC labeling similar
to A and C. Arrows point to the cells with an abundance of
PrP in the cytoplasm. F, Cerebellum of a wt FVB mouse. No cells
labeling positively for PrPC in the cytoplasm were found in the
cerebellum. Purkinje cells (p) are free of intensive cytosolic labeling. Only
faint punctate labeling is visible. Scale bars, 100 µm.
|
|
We consistently saw a small population of cell bodies that were intensely
labeled by both the immunogold and immunofluorescence procedures
(Fig. 1C-E).
These cells with high PrPC content in cell bodies were found with
similar frequency in three of the mouse lines (wt FVB, 4053, 3405) and were
absent in Prnp0/0 mice. These cells were concentrated
predominantly in the CA1 area in the strata pyramidale and oriens with a
frequency of 1-2% of all cells. Furthermore, they were practically absent from
the CA3 area and occasionally seen as small groups in the dentate gyrus. In
addition, a small number of cells with high PrPC labeling in cell
bodies was seen in the somatosensory neocortex (layers V and VI) and ventral
lateral geniculate nucleus of the thalamus (data not shown). We refer to these
cells as cytosolic PrP (CPrP) cells.
We did not observe any CPrP cells in the cerebellum of any of the murine
lines that we analyzed. The immunofluorescent labeling of cerebellar
PrPC was concentrated in the neuropil areas of the molecular layer
and not in the cell bodies (Fig.
1F). In the neocortex and hippocampus, very weak punctate
labeling in the cytoplasm of cerebellar neurons reflected PrPC
localization in intracellular organelles, which was confirmed by subsequent EM
analysis (data not shown).
Ultrastructural distribution of PrPC in the
hippocampus
To gain insight into the precise localization of PrPC at the
ultrastructural level, we used the very same blocks to produce ultrathin
sections immediately after cutting semithin sections from the areas of
interest. Thereby we could assess identical structures at both light and
electron microscopic levels. By EM, PrPC labeling in the neuropil
was predominantly found on the plasma membrane of dendrites, including spines,
as well as dendritic transport vesicles, endosomes, axolemma, axonal transport
vesicles, and myelin sheaths. In addition, the membranes of synaptic
specializations, including presynaptic and postsynaptic membranes, and of
synaptic vesicles (Figs.
2B-E,
3A) labeled positively
for PrPC. However, quantitative analysis showed marked reduction of
labeling on the synaptic vesicle membrane
(Table 1).
Prnp0/0 mice displayed no immunopositive profiles for
PrPC (Fig.
2A).

View larger version (154K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Ultrastructural localization of PrPC in the neuropil in
hippocampal CA1 area. Labeling was performed using Fab D18 and protein A-gold
(10 nm). A, Absence of PrPC labeling in a
Prnp0/0 mouse. B, Stratum radiatum of a wt FVB
mouse. Gold particles are localized on the axolemma (white arrows), myelin
sheaths (white arrowheads), putative axon terminal membranes (black
arrowheads), synaptic vesicles (black arrows), axonal transport vesicle (near
asterisk), and synaptic specialization (double-headed arrow). Gold particles
without arrows belong to processes, which are difficult to identify as being
either dendritic or axonal. C, Stratum radiatum from a wt FVB mouse.
As in B, gold particles can be found at the synaptic specialization
(double-headed arrow) and on the membranes of the postsynaptic profile
(arrowhead). D, Stratum oriens of a wt FVB mouse. Gold particles are
localized on the dendritic shaft (white arrowheads), small processes (white
arrows), and synaptic vesicles (black arrow). E, Stratum radiatum of
a wt FVB mouse, longitudinal section of a dendrite. Gold particles are
localized on the dendritic shaft (white arrowheads), membrane of a spine
(black arrowhead), and small processes (white arrows). The particle inside the
spine probably sits on the spinal apparatus, which is not clearly identifiable
because of the tangential orientation. Relative distribution of the immunogold
labels is provided in Table 1;
B and D do not reflect quantitative information. ax,
Myelinated axon; den, dendrite; m, mitochondria; sb, synaptic bouton; sp,
spine. Scale bars, 200 nm.
|
|

View larger version (161K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. Ultrastructural localization of PrPC in the neuropil of the
stratum radiatum in the hippocampal CA1 area, using Fab D18 conjugated with
UltraSmall gold and enhanced with a silver enhancement kit. A,
Membrane-bound localization of PrPC with dendritic cytosol free of
labeling. PrPC labeling was found on the dendritic shaft, axon
terminal membrane, and profiles of small processes. B, Double
labeling for PrPC and VAMP2. Large particles (silver-enhanced
UltraSmall gold) (arrows) represent anti-PrPC labeling on the
plasma membrane of the axon terminal and dendrites; small (15 nm) gold
particles indicate VAMP2 labeling of synaptic vesicles. at, Axon terminal;
den, dendrite; m, mitochondria; sb, synaptic bouton. Scale bars, 200 nm.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 1. Quantification of PrPc labeling density on the membranes of
and within dendritic, axonal, and synaptic profiles from the neuropil of the
CA1 area and dentate
gyrusa
| |
Light microscopy of immunolabeled sections suggested no preferential
accumulation of PrPC in the profiles of the neuropil. Being aware
that PrPC has been described previously as being enriched in
synapses (Sales et al., 1998
;
Fournier et al., 2000
;
Haeberle et al., 2000
;
Moya et al., 2000
), we checked
the accessibility of other synaptic proteins for immunolabeling on ultrathin
cryosections. In performing double-labeling experiments, we encountered the
problem of false colocalization resulting from an interaction between
secondary antibodies and protein A-gold (data not shown). We circumvented this
artifact by using anti-PrPC Fab fragments directly conjugated with
UltraSmall Aurion gold particles (0.8 nm) that were subsequently enlarged by
silver enhancement (Aurion). Despite a slight decrease in contrast and section
quality, this method excluded artifactual effects such as erroneous
colocalization. Direct labeling with gold-conjugated Fabs demonstrated a
similar labeling pattern (Fig.
3A) to that observed with indirect labeling using Fabs in
combination with secondary antibodies.
Sections were colabeled for the synaptic vesicle-specific protein
synaptobrevin (VAMP2) and PrPC. As expected, VAMP2 was enriched in
synaptic vesicles, whereas PrPC was primarily seen on the plasma
membrane (Fig. 3B).
The levels of PrPC labeling in different layers of the hippocampus
and in different profiles were assessed quantitatively, as described
below.
In both neuronal and glial cells, PrP was detected on the ER, Golgi
complex, endosomes, uncoated transport vesicles, and plasma membrane
(Fig. 4A,B), which are
important parts of the biosynthetic and endocytic pathways. No labeling was
detected in the coated rims of Golgi cisternae
(Fig. 4A),
clathrin-coated pits of the plasma membrane, or clathrin-coated vesicles
(Fig. 4C). Generally,
immunolabeling was negligible or absent from mitochondrial and nuclear
structures. Although the distribution of PrPC in glial cells
(confirmed by GFAP labeling) was not quantified, EM analysis suggests that
they do not express PrPC at levels comparable with neurons, because
surrounding neuropil structures often had more gold particles than glial cells
and their processes (Fig.
5A,B, respectively). Electron micrographs from ultrathin
sections, which were cut directly after semithin sections, revealed the
subcellular location of PrP in those neurons with cell bodies that were
immunopositive for PrPC (i.e., CPrP cells) by light microscopy.
Strikingly, the majority of the immunogold particles was not associated with
surrounding membranous structures (Fig.
6A,D) but were located in the cytosol. Therefore, we
designate this form of PrP as "cytPrP."

View larger version (152K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. PrPC labeling in neuronal cell bodies in the hippocampus of a wt
FVB mouse. A, Pyramidal neuron. Gold particles were found in the
Golgi complex (arrowheads) and were absent from coated rims (asterisks) of
Golgi cisternae. B, Granule neuron from the dentate gyrus. Gold
particles are present in the nuclear envelope (arrow), which is a part of the
ER, on late endosomes-multivesicular bodies (mvb), and on the plasma membrane
(arrowhead). C, Pyramidal neuron. Gold particles are found on the
plasma membrane (arrowheads) and early endosomes (arrows) but not in
clathrin-coated pits or clathrin-coated vesicles (asterisks). ee, Early
endosome; er, endoplasmic reticulum; G, Golgi complex; m, mitochondria; mvb,
late endosomal multivesicular body; n, nucleus; ne, nuclear envelope; pm,
plasma membrane; asterisks, lumen of coated vesicles, pits, and rims. Scale
bars, 200 nm.
|
|

View larger version (170K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. PrPC is not enriched in astrocytes in the hippocampus. A,
B, A strocyte and astrocytic process. Double labeling for PrPC
(small particles) and GFAP (large particles) is shown. Both labels were
enhanced with silver. PrPC is more concentrated on neuropil
membranes (white arrowheads) than on astrocytic membranes (black arrows). The
dashed line in A delineates the astrocytic plasma membrane. er,
Endoplasmic reticulum; m, mitochondria; n, nucleus. Scale bars, 200 nm.
|
|

View larger version (183K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. PrP is concentrated in the cytosol (black arrowheads) in a population of
neurons. A, Gold particles also label PrP in the ER lumen (black
arrows), Golgi cisternae and vesicles (white arrowheads), and in late
endosomes (B, white arrowheads). C, Although cells that are
positive for cytPrP have a denser cytosol than surrounding neurons, this is
not a distinctive feature because there are cells with a dense cytosol
displaying only membrane-bound PrPC labeling on the plasma membrane
(black arrows) and intracellular organelles (white arrowheads). D,
Direct immunolabeling with Fab D18 demonstrates the same cytPrP abundance as
seen with indirect labeling methods (compare with A and B).
The space indicated by the opposing arrows shows the lumen of the ER. er,
Endoplasmic reticulum; G, Golgi complex; le, late endosome; m, mitochondria;
n, nucleus; pm, plasma membrane. Scale bars, 200 nm.
|
|
Morphologically, CPrP cells appear to have abundant dense cytoplasms, long
cisternae of the ER, well developed Golgi complexes, endosomal and lysosomal
structures, well structured mitochondria, and often a nucleus with an
irregular shape. The cells show an irregular distribution of cytPrP, shifted
to the periphery of the cell and mostly excluded from the pericentrosomal
region. The cytosolic labeling can be classified as specific because it
exceeded >100x (see below) the background labeling in pyramidal
neurons, which were immunonegative by light microscopy. A small number of gold
particles was found in the lumen of biosynthetic pathway organelles, such as
the ER, Golgi complex, and endosomes (Fig.
6A,B). From these data, we conclude that there could be
two isoforms of PrPC in these cells, one that is membrane-bound and
another that is cytosolic.
We detected cytPrP with Fabs recognizing the central region (D18 and D13)
(Fig. 6), N-terminal region
(Est123 and Est149), and C-terminal region (R1 and R2) of PrPC. Fab
D18 conjugated with UltraSmall gold gave the same pattern of labeling
(Fig. 6D).
Furthermore, SAF32 and 8H4 monoclonal antibodies were equally able to detect
cytPrP (data not shown). This argues that full-length PrP molecules that were
present in the cytosol probably bound to some factor or aggregated into
multimeric complexes, which prevent diffusion into the nucleus. Theoretically,
a proteosome could cut PrP molecules into fragments, which are recognizable by
all applied antibodies. However, this scenario seems much less likely, because
either fragments of degraded proteins are destroyed very quickly by various
peptidases present in the cytosol or the peptides should be detectable in the
nucleus where they are unavailable for degradation
(Reits et al., 2003
).
The soma and dendritic processes of cells with cytPrP receive synaptic
input from other neurons (Fig.
7A). Occasionally, axonal terminals with unusually high
labeling for PrPC were also found in the neuropil
(Fig. 7B). We assume
that these axonal terminals are derived from CPrP cells, but it remains to be
proven because of the low resolution of the immunogold method in structures
densely packed with membranes. Furthermore, CPrP cells were negative for GFAP,
CNPase, and S100 glial cells markers (data not shown), and their morphology
was different to that of glia but more closely resembled that of
interneurons.

View larger version (172K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. Cells with cytPrP are probably of a neuronal nature and have a functional
GPI-biosynthetic machinery. A, Cells with cytPrP receive synaptic
input from other neurons on their cell body and dendrites. B, An
axonal terminal shows high labeling for PrPC and is most likely
derived from a CPrP cell. Because of the high abundance of synaptic vesicles,
the exact localization of PrPC is unclear. C, Normal CA1
pyramidal neurons have no PrP (small particles) or Thy-1 (big particles;
arrows) in cytosol. PrPC and Thy-1 are concentrated in the Golgi
complex and late endosomes. D, CPrP cells demonstrate both cytosolic
and membrane-bound PrP (small particles) and only membrane-bound Thy-1,
another GPI-anchored protein (big particles; arrows). at, Axon terminal; den,
dendrite; er, endoplasmic reticulum; G, Golgi complex; m, mitochondria; le,
late endosome; sb, synaptic bouton. Scale bars, 200 nm.
|
|
Previous studies have shown that inhibitory interneurons may play a
prominent role in the pathogenesis of prion diseases
(Belichenko et al., 1999
;
Bouzamondo et al., 2000
). Thus,
we attempted to determine whether these cells are indeed of the interneuronal
GABAergic type using several different markers for particular cell
populations. None of the CPrP cells were immunopositive for calbindin,
calreticulin, parvalbumin, vasointestinal peptide, neuropeptide Y,
somatostatin, and b-NOS (data not shown). Therefore, the specific type of
neurons to which CPrP cells belong remains to be determined.
The cytosolic localization of PrP could reflect a particular state of the
neuron, which may cause or result from a dysfunction of the machinery that
generates GPI-anchored proteins. To check for the latter possibility, we
labeled these neurons for both PrPC and another abundant
GPI-anchored protein, Thy-1. In pyramidal neurons as well as CPrP cells, the
labeling against Thy-1 was concentrated on late endosomes and the plasma
membrane (Fig. 7C,D)
without any indication of cytosolic distribution. This argues that the
GPI-adding machinery functions normally in these neurons, and another factor
must account for the presence of both cytosolic and membrane-bound PrP.
CPrP cells are neither necrotic nor apoptotic
Whether PrP accumulation in the cytosol reflects stress or damage to the
cells is unknown. However, morphological examination of these neurons did not
reveal organelle swelling (mitochondria, ER, Golgi apparatus), disaggregation
of polyribosomes, or cell and nuclear membrane breaks that are clearly
indicative of neuronal necrosis. Furthermore, we did not observe any apoptotic
signs such as chromatin clumping, condensation of cytoplasmic content, or
accumulation of autophagic lysosomes. Mitochondria displayed organized
structure with well preserved cristae, inner and outer membranes. Some of
these neurons had a denser cytosol than pyramidal neurons, but it was not a
feature distinguishing these neurons from others. We saw a number of
"dense cells" without signs of PrP accumulation in the cytosol
(Fig. 6C). Moreover,
many neurons with cytPrP appeared to have a normal cytosolic density, similar
to other neurons. Although morphological analysis remains the "gold
standard" for assessment and quantification of apoptosis
(Hall, 1999
), we nevertheless
checked CPrP cells on semithin sections using an apoptosis detection kit (on
the basis of TUNEL methodology). None of the CPrP cells appeared to be
apoptotic (Fig.
8A-C).

View larger version (149K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 8. Correlated light (A-C) and electron (D,E)
microscopic pictures of the same CPrP cell. A-C, Serial semithin
hippocampal sections labeled against PrPC (red) and TUNEL staining
(green). A, Section treated with 1 U per 1 ml of DNaseI as the
positive control. Nuclei from all cells are highly fluorescent, indicating
broken DNA strands. B, C, Serial sections not treated with DNaseI.
CPrP and pyramidal neurons show no signal for broken DNA strands, indicating
that these cells are not apoptotic. The asterisk in C indicates a
cell imaged by EM in D. D, Low-magnification EM image of the
cell marked with an asterisk in C. The blue line delineates the
border of the CPrP cell. Note the absence of chromatine clumping. E,
Higher magnification of the rectanglular area in D with cytosolic
immunogold (15 nm) labeling against PrP. The majority of the immunogold is
localized in the cytosol (arrowheads). er, Endoplasmic reticulum; m,
mitochondria; n, nucleus; pm, plasma membrane. Scale bars: (in C)
A--C, 50 µm; D, 2 µm; E, 200 nm.
|
|
Quantification of PrPC in the hippocampus
The use of gold particles and the good ultrastructural preservation
produced by ultracryomicrotomy gave us the opportunity to quantify the
distribution of PrPC in the hippocampus. All segments of dendritic
membranes (dendritic shaft, spines, transport vesicles, and endocytic
structures) showed approximately the same density of gold particles per unit
of membrane (Table 1). The same
structures in the molecular layer of the dentate gyrus had less labeling than
those in the strata oriens and radiatum, matching precisely the labeling
pattern observed by LM via immunofluorescence and silver enhancement. Axonal
membranes had a lower gold particle density than dendritic membranes. Myelin
sheaths were labeled with fewer gold particles per length of membrane than
axolemma (Table 1).
Interestingly, we found similar PrPC concentrations on the membrane
of presynaptic and postsynaptic profiles and on those within the synapse. No
preferential labeling was observed within the synaptic specialization.
Synaptic vesicles were labeled just above the background level determined for
mitochondria, suggesting an exclusion of PrPC from this
structure.
Proteins linked to the plasma membrane by either a GPI anchor or a
transmembrane domain travel along the secretory pathway. This begins with the
synthesis of the protein, then translocation into the ER, and finally movement
through the Golgi complex toward the final destination, the plasma membrane.
At various stages along the pathway, the proteins may become concentrated. We
therefore analyzed the distribution of PrPC on various organelles
and membranes that are involved with the trafficking pathway from four
hippocampal cell populations: pyramidal neurons (CA1), granule neurons
(dentate gyrus), hilar neurons, and CPrP cells. We quantified the distribution
in the same manner as for the neuropil, counting the number of gold particles
per micrometer of organelle membrane (Table
2). The data are grouped according to cell type (pyramidal
neurons, granule neurons, hilar neurons, and CPrP cells) and organelles (ER,
Golgi, endosomes, transport vesicles, and plasma membrane). The overall
distribution of gold particles was similar in all types of cells analyzed. The
lowest concentration of PrPC was detected in the ER and Golgi
complex. An increase in PrPC concentration occurs on the plasma
membrane and in late endosomes-multivesicular bodies. Our findings correlate
nicely with previously published results about the folate receptor, a
GPI-anchored protein in cultured cells
(Mayor et al., 1998
;
Chatterjee et al., 2001
).
Labeling for cytPrP was negligible in all neurons except CPrP cells, in which
the number of gold particles exceeded >200 times the usual background level
from the three other types of neurons
(Table 3).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 2. Quantification of PrPc labeling on the membrane in different
neuronal populations in the CA1 area and dentate
gyrusa
| |
The statistical significance of labeling for cytPrP was assessed by the RLI
(Mayhew et al., 2002
) on the
basis of a comparison between the expected and observed distributions of the
gold particles. The expected gold particle distribution is derived from a
lattice of test points used for morphometric counting. The null hypothesis
corresponds to a random distribution (RLI = 1) of the marker between
compartments such as the nucleus, mitochondria, and cytosol. The RLI for PrP
in the cytosol of CPrP cells attained a value of 3.12
(Table 4), which indicates
preferential nonrandom labeling. The total
2 value (the sum of
partial values) is 1864.2, indicating that the null hypothesis must be
rejected (p < 0.001). The partial
2 values show
that the most important contributor to the total
2 value is
cytPrP.
 |
Discussion
|
|---|
We determined the ultrastructural distribution of PrPC in murine
hippocampus using a number of recombinant Fabs generated against different
parts of PrPC, the N terminus, central region, and C terminus. In
addition, we also present the first quantitative data on the localization of
PrPC in the CA1 region and dentate gyrus of the hippocampus of
several lines of wt in-bred mice.
We found the following: (1) PrPC generally follows the standard
biosynthetic trafficking pathway in brain neurons with prominent presence in
endosomes and the plasma membrane; (2) PrPC has a ubiquitous
distribution on the neuronal plasma membrane and cellular processes without
preferential accumulation at synaptic specializations; (3) PrPC is
found with the same frequency on presynaptic as well as postsynaptic membranes
and within the synapse; (4) PrPC is almost excluded from the
membrane of synaptic vesicles; and (5) PrP is expressed in the cytosol in a
small population of neurons in the hippocampus, thalamus, and somatosensory
neocortex but not in the cerebellum.
Localization and quantification of PrPC in the
hippocampus
At the light microscopic level, we saw preferential PrPC
labeling of the strata oriens, radiatum, and moleculare of the dentate gyrus,
which closely resembles previous results
(Sales et al., 1998
;
Moya et al., 2000
). Because of
an abundance of synapses in these areas, it was concluded that the pattern of
staining is "very close to synaptic in nature" and similar to the
rab3 labeling (Moya et al.,
2000
). The punctate appearance of labeling could reflect the local
concentrations of GPI-anchored proteins on the plasma membrane of neurites, as
shown previously (Madore et al.,
1999
). Furthermore, double labeling for PrPC and either
synaptophysin (Fournier et al.,
2000
) or rab3 (Moya et al.,
2000
) was not resolved well enough to claim unambiguously the
colocalization of these proteins on the same subcellular structure. We
demonstrated clearly that synaptobrevin and PrPC are localized on
separate synaptic compartments. Therefore, we argue against a significant
biological role of PrPC in synaptic vesicles. However, it does not
preclude an indirect role.
The very low level of labeling of synaptic vesicles in our study does not
deny the potential involvement of the synapse in the pathogenesis of prion
diseases, as proposed by Fournier et al.
(2000
). The exclusion of
PrPC from synaptic vesicles in our studies correlates with the
morphological and biochemical data by Laine et al.
(2001
) and Herms et al.
(1999
). The presence of
PrPC in all parts of the plasma membrane, whether somatic, axonal,
synaptic, or dendritic membranes (with the highest concentration on the last),
argues for a more general physiological function than merely a synaptic one.
Various potential functions have been proposed by several authors, including
oxidative stress protection (Brown et al.,
2001
), copper metabolism
(Pauly and Harris, 1998
),
signal transduction (Mouillet-Richard et
al., 2000
), and mediator of intercellular contacts
(Rieger et al., 1999
;
Schmitt-Ulms et al.,
2001
).
The relative concentration of PrPC in organelles along the
trafficking pathway observed in our study agrees well with the general theory
that proteins are concentrated along this pathway en route to the
plasma membrane. Here, we present quantitative morphological results on the
localization and concentration of PrPC in subcellular organelles of
the trafficking pathway in neurons in situ. These results are in
agreement with the intracellular retention of GPI-anchored proteins in
endosomal compartments (Mayor et al.,
1998
) and with data concerning the recycling of PrPC
from plasma membranes via endosomes (Shyng
et al., 1993
). Reports on the concentration of PrPSc in
endosomal and lysosomal structures
(Caughey et al., 1991
;
McKinley et al., 1991
;
Borchelt et al., 1992
;
Taraboulos et al., 1992b
;
Arnold et al., 1995
) underscore
the importance of these sites for PrPC degradation and possibly
PrPC-to-PrPSc conversion.
The absence of PrP labeling in clathrin-coated structures contradicts the
suggestions by Laine et al.
(2001
). However, their data
could be attributed to either the possible diffusion of the peroxidase
reaction product to nearby locations, giving false-positive results, or too
low concentrations of PrPC in clathrin-coated structures, which
were undetectable by our immunogold procedure. Because it is known that
neurons do not have calveoli, we can speculate that PrPC recycles
through endosomes via a nonclathrin, noncalveoli pathway
(Peters et al., 2003
).
The almost ubiquitous distribution of PrPC on the neuronal
plasma membrane and cellular processes without a preferential accumulation at
synaptic specializations suggests the absence of active retention mechanisms,
allowing unhampered diffusion of PrPC along cellular membranes.
This diffusion could play a major role in PrPSc propagation,
because it was shown that a defective fast axonal transport did not interfere
with prion neuroinvasion (Kunzi et al.,
2002
). It is entirely plausible that PrPSc, which
retains the GPI anchor, could physically contact PrPC on adjacent
cells or even be physically translocated to the membranes from neighboring
cells (Liu et al., 2002
) at
sites of very close apposition to cellular membranes, including at the
synapse. Additionally, the finding of significant PrPC labeling in
myelin sheaths points to the possible involvement of oligodendrocytes in the
propagation of prion diseases.
Neurons containing cytPrP
Our studies revealed the existence of neurons containing cytPrP. These
cells showed a very different morphology from glial cells and are negative for
GFAP (an astroglial marker) and CNPase and S100 (oligodendrocytic markers). We
observed synapses on cell bodies and processes as well as axonal terminals
with a high PrPC content, which probably belong to CPrP cells. On
the basis of our LM and EM observations, we assumed CPrP cells to be of
neuronal nature. However, we are still focusing our efforts on identifying the
neuronal subtype. An antibody against GABA (the most commonly used marker for
interneurons) did not give any positive labeling in cryosections. We believe
that this can be explained by the fact that a very small molecule, such as
GABA, is not adequately retained in cryosections, despite the use of
glutaraldehyde. The additional cross-linking through an embedding medium, such
as resin, may be necessary to preserve GABA localization in ultrathin sections
(Bouzamondo et al., 2000
), but
it inevitably destroys the antigen sites for PrPC antibodies (our
unpublished observations).
PrP accumulation in the cytosol might depend on the circadian cycle of the
cells or reflect damage and stress. However, morphological examination of
these neurons did not show any organelle swelling, disaggregating of
polyribosomes, or breaks in the cell and nuclear membranes that are indicative
of neuronal necrosis. Furthermore, we did not find any morphological or
immunocytochemical apoptotic indicators. The absence of TUNEL labeling
revealed that CPrP cells do not possess breaks in nuclear DNA that are
characteristic of apoptotic cells. Therefore, we conclude that these cells did
not suffer any observable damage that could be responsible for the unusual
localization of PrP.
Although it seems unusual for a cell to have a protein in two such distinct
locations (the membranes of the trafficking pathway and the cytosol), it is
entirely plausible that a protein such as PrPC could have roles in
more than one compartment of a cell (Hegde
and Lingappa, 1999
). Such a diversity of function from a single
gene has been observed for the protein calreticulin, which was found to
function in the ER, cytosol, and nucleus
(Smith and Koch, 1989
;
Burns et al., 1994
;
Coppolino et al., 1997
).
Similarly, dual localization of other proteins or protein domains has also
been described for the plasminogen activator protein
(Belin et al., 1996
) and the
hepatitis B virus envelope protein
(Swameye and Schaller, 1997
).
It has been shown that PrPC has a rather complex signal sequence,
which directs it to the lumen of the ER
(Zhang and Ling, 1995
;
Hegde et al., 1998
;
Holscher et al., 2001
;
Kim et al., 2001
). Therefore,
it is possible that the synthesis of the different topological forms of
PrPC varies between different cell types, according to the
expression of different cytoplasmic components of the translocation machinery
(Hegde and Lingappa,
1999
).
The dislocation of PrP from the ER to the cytosol has been demonstrated
previously in cell culture systems under certain conditions, such as in a
reducing environment and glycosylation (Ma
and Lindquist, 2001
) or proteosomal
(Yedidia et al., 2001
)
inhibition. This could explain the presence of cytPrP in situ.
However, the absence of GPI-anchored Thy-1 in the cytosol of CPrP cells argues
that other GPI-anchored proteins preserve their usual localization. Because
proteosome inhibition should affect many proteins, an unknown specific
mechanism for PrP accumulation in the cytosol may be present.
It was recently shown that transfected cytPrP appears to be toxic in both
cell culture and transgenic animals, in a cell type-dependent manner. Only
cerebellar cells appeared to be affected in mice that expressed
PrPC without an ER translocation signal
(Ma et al., 2002
).
Accumulation of cytPrP in "susceptible" neurons might be
responsible for some of the variants of prion diseases in which cytPrP
aggregates kill the cell and cause release of infectious prions. These prions
might then initiate the vicious circle of prion propagation. However, our
studies show that cytPrP is present in normal rodent brains in a population of
neurons that appears healthy and shows no cellular degeneration. Thus, we can
infer that cytPrP is not toxic in some neurons but highly toxic when
overexpressed in specific cell populations. More work is needed to elucidate
the causes of such striking differences resulting from cytPrP.
 |
Footnotes
|
|---|
Received Nov. 1, 2002;
revised Feb. 28, 2003;
accepted Mar. 18, 2003.
We thank Hang Nguyen for outstanding editorial work, Erik Bos for excellent
technical assistance, and E. van Donselaar for extensive preliminary testing
of many anti-PrPC antibodies. We are grateful to M. van der Valk
for generous advice, K. de Goeij, J. Bulthuis, and M. Tjin-A-Koeng for
technical assistance in pilot experiments, and N. Ong for help with the
photographs.
Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Peter J. Peters, The Netherlands
Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121-H4, 1066 CX
Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail:
p.peters{at}nki.nl.
Copyright © 2003 Society for Neuroscience
0270-6474/03/237183-11$15.00/0
 |
References
|
|---|
Amit AG, Mariuzza RA, Phillips SE, Poljak RJ (1986)
Three-dimensional structure of an antigen-antibody complex at 2.8 Å
resolution. Science 233:
747-753.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Arnold JE, Tipler C, Laszlo L, Hope J, Landon M, Mayer RJ
(1995) The abnormal isoform of the prion protein accumulates in
late-endosome-like organelles in scrapie-infected mouse brain. J
Pathol 176:
403-411.[ISI][Medline]
Belichenko PV, Miklossy J, Belser B, Budka H, Celio MR
(1999) Early destruction of the extracellular matrix around
parvalbumin-immunoreactive interneurons in Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
Neurobiol Dis 6:
269-279.[ISI][Medline]
Belin D, Bost S, Vassalli JD, Strub K (1996) A
two-step recognition of signal sequences determines the translocation
efficiency of proteins. EMBO J 15:
468-478.[ISI][Medline]
Bendheim PE, Brown HR, Rudelli RD, Scala LJ, Goller NL, Wen GY,
Kascsak RJ, Cashman NR, Bolton DC (1992) Nearly ubiquitous tissue
distribution of the scrapie agent precursor protein. Neurology
42: 149-156.[Medline]
Borchelt DR, Taraboulos A, Prusiner SB (1992) Evidence
for synthesis of scrapie prion proteins in the endocytic pathway. J
Biol Chem 267:
16188-16199.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Bouzamondo E, DeArmond SJ, Ralston HJ, Prusiner SB, Milroy AM
(2000) Selective neuronal vulnerability during experimental
scrapie infection: insights from an ultrastructural investigation.
Brain Res 874:
210-215.[Medline]
Brown DR, Clive C, Haswell SJ (2001) Antioxidant
activity related to copper binding of native prion protein. J
Neurochem 76:
69-76.[Medline]
Büeler H, Aguzzi A, Sailer A, Greiner R-A, Autenried P, Aguet
M, Weissmann C (1993) Mice devoid of PrP are resistant to
scrapie. Cell 73:
1339-1347.[ISI][Medline]
Burns K, Duggan B, Atkinson EA, Famulsk KS, Nemer M, Bleackley RC,
Michalak M (1994) Modulation of gene expression by calreticulin
binding to the glucocorticoid receptor. Nature
367: 476-480.[Medline]
Caughey B, Raymond GJ, Ernst D, Race RE (1991)
N-terminal truncation of the scrapie-associated form of PrP by lysosomal
protease(s): implications regarding the site of conversion of PrP to the
protease-resistant state. J Virol 65:
6597-6603.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Chatterjee S, Smith ER, Hanada K, Stevens VL, Mayor S
(2001) GPI anchoring leads to sphingolipid-dependent retention of
endocytosed proteins in the recycling endosomal compartment. EMBO
J 20:
1583-1592.[ISI][Medline]
Coppolino MG, Woodside MJ, Demaurex N, Grinstein S, St. Arnaud R,
Dedhar S (1997) Calreticulin is essential for integrin-mediated
calcium signalling and cell adhesion. Nature
386: 843-847.[Medline]
DeArmond SJ, Mobley WC, DeMott DL, Barry RA, Beckstead JH, Prusiner
SB (1987) Changes in the localization of brain prion proteins
during scrapie infection. Neurology 37:
1271-1280.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Ford MJ, Burton LJ, Li H, Graham CH, Frobert Y, Grassi J, Hall SM,
Morris RJ (2002) A marked disparity between the expression of
prion protein and its message by neurones of the CNS.
Neuroscience 111:
533-551.[ISI][Medline]
Fournier J-G, Escaig-Haye F, De Villemeur TB, Robain O
(1995) Ultrastructural localization of cellular prion protein
(PrPC) in synaptic boutons of normal hamster hippocampus. C
R Acad Sci III 318:
339-344.[Medline]
Fournier JG, Escaig-Haye F, Grigoriev V (2000)
Ultrastructural localization of prion proteins: physiological and pathological
implications. Microsc Res Tech 50:
76-88.[ISI][Medline]
Griffiths G (1993) Fine structure
immunocytochemistry. New York: Springer.
Haeberle AM, Ribaut-Barassin C, Bombarde G, Mariani J, Hunsmann G,
Grassi J, Bailly Y (2000) Synaptic prion protein
immuno-reactivity in the rodent cerebellum. Microsc Res Tech
50: 66-75.[ISI][Medline]
Hall PA (1999) Assessing apoptosis: a critical survey.
Endocr Relat Cancer 6:
3-8.[Abstract]
Hegde RS, Lingappa VR (1999) Regulation of protein
biogenesis at the endoplasmic reticulum membrane. Trends Cell
Biol 9:
132-137.[ISI][Medline]
Hegde RS, Mastrianni JA, Scott MR, DeFea KA, Tremblay P, Torchia M,
DeArmond SJ, Prusiner SB, Lingappa VR (1998) A transmembrane form
of the prion protein in neurodegenerative disease. Science
279: 827-834.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Herms JW, Tings T, Gall S, Madlung A, Giese A, Siebert H, Schurmann
P, Windl O, Brose N, Kretzschmar H (1999) Evidence of presynaptic
location and function of the prion protein. J Neurosci
19: 8866-8875.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Holscher C, Bach UC, Dobberstein B (2001) Prion
protein contains a second endoplasmic reticulum targeting signal sequence
located at its C terminus. J Biol Chem
276: 13388-13394.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Kim SJ, Rahbar R, Hegde RS (2001) Combinatorial
control of prion protein biogenesis by the signal sequence and transmembrane
domain. J Biol Chem 276:
26132-26140.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Kunzi V, Glatzel M, Nakano MY, Greber UF, Van Leuven F, Aguzzi A
(2002) Unhampered prion neuroinvasion despite impaired fast
axonal transport in transgenic mice overexpressing four-repeat tau. J
Neurosci 22:
7471-7477.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Kretzschmar HA, Prusiner SB, Stowring LE, DeArmond SJ
(1986) Scrapie prion proteins are synthesized in neurons.
Am J Pathol 122:
1-5.[Abstract]
Laine J, Marc ME, Sy MS, Axelrad H (2001) Cellular and
subcellular morphological localization of normal prion protein in rodent
cerebellum. Eur J Neurosci 14:
47-56.[ISI][Medline]
Leclerc E, Peretz D, Ball H, Sakurai H, Legname G, Serban A,
Prusiner SB, Burton DR, Williamson RA (2001) Immobilized prion
protein undergoes spontaneous rearrangement to a conformation having features
in common with the infectious form. EMBO J
20: 1547-1554.[ISI][Medline]
Liu T, Li R, Pan T, Liu D, Petersen RB, Wong BS, Gambetti P, Sy MS
(2002) Intercellular transfer of the cellular prion protein.