Skip to main content

Umbrella menu

  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Preparing a Manuscript
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Fees
    • Journal Club
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • SfN.org
  • eNeuro
  • The Journal of Neuroscience
  • Neuronline
  • BrainFacts.org

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Preparing a Manuscript
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Fees
    • Journal Club
    • eLetters
    • Submit
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Articles, Neurobiology of Disease

A Cav3.2 T-Type Calcium Channel Point Mutation Has Splice-Variant-Specific Effects on Function and Segregates with Seizure Expression in a Polygenic Rat Model of Absence Epilepsy

Kim L. Powell, Stuart M. Cain, Caroline Ng, Shreerang Sirdesai, Laurence S. David, Mervyn Kyi, Esperanza Garcia, John R. Tyson, Christopher A. Reid, Melanie Bahlo, Simon J. Foote, Terrance P. Snutch and Terence J. O'Brien
Journal of Neuroscience 14 January 2009, 29 (2) 371-380; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5295-08.2009
Kim L. Powell
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stuart M. Cain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Caroline Ng
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shreerang Sirdesai
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laurence S. David
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mervyn Kyi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Esperanza Garcia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John R. Tyson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher A. Reid
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Melanie Bahlo
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simon J. Foote
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Terrance P. Snutch
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Terence J. O'Brien
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Representative EEG traces from m/m (a, d), +/m (b, e), and m/m (c, f) animals over a 10 s period (a–c) and a 5 min period (d–f). +/+ animals are null for the R1584P mutation (gcm), +/m animals carry one copy of the mutation, and m/m animals are homozygous for the gcm mutation.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    The gcm mutation positively correlates with the epileptic phenotype in double-crossed (F2) GAERS versus NEC rats. a, Percentage of recording time spent in seizure activity. Animals homozygous for the mutation spend more time in seizure activity than animals null for the gcm (p < 0.05, Mann–Whitney one-tailed test). b, Number of seizures. Animals homozygous for the gcm experience more seizures than animals null for the mutation (p < 0.05, Mann–Whitney one-tailed test). c, The interval between the seizures was significantly shorter for animals homozygous for the mutation compared with animals null for the mutation (p < 0.05, Mann–Whitney one-tailed test). d, The length of individual seizures did not significantly differ between the genotypes (p > 0.05, Mann–Whitney one-tailed test). e, The cycle frequency of the spike-and-wave discharges (hertz) did not significantly differ between the genotypes (p > 0.05, Mann–Whitney one-tailed test). +/+ animals are null for the gcm, +/m animals have one copy of the gcm, and m/m animals are homozygous for the gcm. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Differential expression of Cav3.2 splice variants in NEC and GAERS animals. Exon 25 of the rat Cacna1h gene is alternatively spliced to produce Cav3.2 (+25) and Cav3.2 (−25) isoforms. The Cav3.2 (−25) variant channels have a lysine residue at position 1598. This lysine residue is replaced by the 7 aa sequence (STFPNPE) in the Cav3.2 (+25) variant. The R1584P mutation (gcm) site is located 13 aa upstream of the beginning of exon 25 region (underlined arginine residue).

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    The gcm accelerates rate of recovery from inactivation in the Cav3.2 (+25) splice variant. a, b, The conductance (filled symbols) of Cav3.2 (+25) (a) and Cav3.2 (−25) (b) and steady-state inactivation (open symbols) of Cav3.2 (+25) (a) and Cav3.2 (−25) (b) were not significantly altered by the gcm. Insets (a, b) show overlaid gcm and wild-type macroscopic currents during a 150 ms depolarizing pulse from a holding potential of −110 to −20 mV. Activation and inactivation kinetics of Cav3.2 (+25) (a, inset) and Cav3.2 (−25) (b, inset) splice variant currents are not affected by the gcm. Cav3.2 conductance was calculated from currents recorded during a series of depolarizing steps from a holding potential of −110 mV to various membrane potentials and normalized to maximum conductance. Steady-state inactivation was calculated from Cav3.2 currents recorded during a test pulse to −30 mV directly after a 2 s inactivating prepulse of varying membrane potentials and normalized to peak current. c, d, The effect of the gcm on fractional recovery (determined by the ratio of the peak current at the test pulse to the peak current at the prepulse and fitted to a double exponential) is shown for Cav3.2 (+25) (c) and Cav3.2 (−25) (d). Cav3.2 currents were recorded during test voltage pulses from a holding potential of −110 to −30 mV after an inactivating prepulse, with an increasing interpulse interval. e, f, Representative traces obtained at test pulses after 160, 320, 640, and 1280 ms interpulse intervals are shown for Cav3.2 (+25) (e) and Cav3.2 (−25) (f) currents. Normalized Cav3.2 (+25) currents from 80 to 2560 ms interpulse intervals were significantly increased in the gcm [80 ms: wild type, 0.25 ± 0.02; gcm, 0.31 ± 0.02 (p < 0.05); 160 ms: wild type, 0.35 ± 0.02; gcm, 0.45 ± 0.02 (p < 0.01); 320 ms: wild type, 0.52 ± 0.03; gcm, 0.67 ± 0.03 (p < 0.005); 640 ms: wild type, 0.70 ± 0.04; gcm, 0.92 ± 0.04 (p < 0.005); 1280 ms: wild type, 0.94 ± 0.05; gcm, 1.12 ± 0.05 (p < 0.05); 2560: wild type, 1.04 ± 0.04; gcm, 1.16 ± 0.04 (p < 0.05); wild type, n = 11; gcm, n = 12].

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    The gcm increases the charge transference of Cav3.2 (+25) during high-frequency burst depolarizing trains. a–c, Representative traces of Cav3.2 (+25) wild-type (a) and Cav3.2 (+25) gcm (b) currents recorded during high-frequency depolarizing train pulses (125 Hz for 80 ms) from −70 to −20 mV occurring in bursts (5 Hz for 1 s) (c). Charge transference of Cav3.2 during each burst was divided by the peak current on first pulse of the first burst to account for variations in current magnitude. d, In Cav3.2 (+25), the gcm significantly increased the charge transference factor in all subsequent bursts after one 125 Hz burst. e, In Cav3.2 (−25), the gcm had no significant effect on the charge transference factor. Data are represented as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, significant difference between charge transference factors (ANOVA).

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Summary of the genetic alterations in the rat Cav3.2 T-type calcium channel gene

    Mutation 1Mutation 2Mutation 3Mutation 4
    Base pair number4751262054396580
    Exon24113135
    Affected residue number158487318132194
    R. norvegicusGACT
    NECGGTG
    GAERSCGTG
    Codon changeCGG → CCGaGCA → GCGbTTC → TTTbTCA → GCAb
    Amino acid changeArg → ProAla → AlaPhe → PheSer → Ala
    Type of mutationNonsynonymousSynonymousSynonymousNonsynonymous
    Structural locationLinker III–IVIIS3–IIS4IVS5COOH
    Conservation between speciesConserved regionConserved regionConserved regionNonconserved
    • In addition to the gcm mutation, three more mutations were detected in the Wistar (NEC and GAERS) strains compared with R. norvegicus. Two of these mutations are silent and do not cause amino acid changes, whereas the third causes a TCA (serine) to CCA (alanine) change. However, none of these three mutations differed between the NEC and GAERS.

    • ↵aCodon and amino acid change between NEC and GAERS.

    • ↵bCodon and amino acid change between Wistar rats versus R. norvegicus.

    • View popup
    Table 2.

    Whole-cell conductance, steady-state inactivation, and recovery from inactivation properties of Cav3.2 (±25) splice variants in the presence and absence of the gcm

    Biophysical propertiesCav3.2 (+25)Cav3.2 (+25) gcmCav3.2 (−25)Cav3.2 (−25) gcm
    Conductance
        V50−41.2 ± 1.2−43.3 ± 1.0−41.9 ± 1.2−42.6 ± 2.2
        k−7.0 ± 0.3−6.0 ± 0.3−7.0 ± 0.4−7.0 ± 0.5
        Gmax7.7 ± 0.98.6 ± 1.09.7 ± 2.07.0 ± 1.06
        Peak I density (pA/pF)−22.3 ± 3.2−30.1 ± 4.4−19.0 ± 3.5−19.4 ± 3.8
    Steady-state inactivation
        V50−65.1 ± 1.2−66.1 ± 1.2−65.2 ± 1.2−67.5 ± 2.3
        k3.9 ± 0.44.1 ± 0.33.9 ± 0.44.4 ± 1.0
    Recovery from inactivation
        τ 127.5 ± 2.124.1 ± 2.533.1 ± 3.825.3 ± 5.7
        τ 2745.0 ± 32.2436.8 ± 37.6*328.5 ± 35.8430.5 ± 25.3**
    • All values were calculated individually for each cell and the mean ± SEM taken to achieve the stated values (ANOVA; *p < 0.001, **p < 0.05 compared with wild-type control).

    • View popup
    Table 3.

    Mean ± SEM charge transference values for Cav3.2 (±25) splice variants in the presence and absence of the gcm during high-frequency bursts

    Charge, Cav3.2 (+25)Transference, Cav3.2 (+25) gcmFactor, Cav3.2 (−25)Q/pA, Cav3.2 (−25) gcm
    Burst 113.5 ± 1.015.5 ± 0.714.4 ± 0.814.6 ± 1.3
    Burst 23.9 ± 0.45.9 ± 0.6*6.3 ± 0.76.9 ± 1.0
    Burst 32.4 ± 0.33.7 ± 0.5*4.2 ± 0.64.0 ± 0.8
    Burst 41.67 ± 0.23.6 ± 0.7**3.5 ± 0.43.6 ± 0.6
    Burst 51.5 ± 0.22.6 ± 0.4*3.1 ± 0.42.8 ± 0.6
    • ANOVA,

    • ↵*p < 0.05,

    • ↵**p < 0.01 compared with wild-type control.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Data

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • supplemental material - Supplemental Table
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 29 (2)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 29, Issue 2
14 Jan 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A Cav3.2 T-Type Calcium Channel Point Mutation Has Splice-Variant-Specific Effects on Function and Segregates with Seizure Expression in a Polygenic Rat Model of Absence Epilepsy
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
A Cav3.2 T-Type Calcium Channel Point Mutation Has Splice-Variant-Specific Effects on Function and Segregates with Seizure Expression in a Polygenic Rat Model of Absence Epilepsy
Kim L. Powell, Stuart M. Cain, Caroline Ng, Shreerang Sirdesai, Laurence S. David, Mervyn Kyi, Esperanza Garcia, John R. Tyson, Christopher A. Reid, Melanie Bahlo, Simon J. Foote, Terrance P. Snutch, Terence J. O'Brien
Journal of Neuroscience 14 January 2009, 29 (2) 371-380; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5295-08.2009

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
A Cav3.2 T-Type Calcium Channel Point Mutation Has Splice-Variant-Specific Effects on Function and Segregates with Seizure Expression in a Polygenic Rat Model of Absence Epilepsy
Kim L. Powell, Stuart M. Cain, Caroline Ng, Shreerang Sirdesai, Laurence S. David, Mervyn Kyi, Esperanza Garcia, John R. Tyson, Christopher A. Reid, Melanie Bahlo, Simon J. Foote, Terrance P. Snutch, Terence J. O'Brien
Journal of Neuroscience 14 January 2009, 29 (2) 371-380; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5295-08.2009
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Articles

  • Choice Behavior Guided by Learned, But Not Innate, Taste Aversion Recruits the Orbitofrontal Cortex
  • Maturation of Spontaneous Firing Properties after Hearing Onset in Rat Auditory Nerve Fibers: Spontaneous Rates, Refractoriness, and Interfiber Correlations
  • Insulin Treatment Prevents Neuroinflammation and Neuronal Injury with Restored Neurobehavioral Function in Models of HIV/AIDS Neurodegeneration
Show more Articles

Neurobiology of Disease

  • Parkinsonism alters beta burst dynamics across the basal ganglia-motor cortical network
  • α-Synuclein Oligomers Induce Glutamate Release from Astrocytes and Excessive Extrasynaptic NMDAR Activity in Neurons, Thus Contributing to Synapse Loss
  • A new mouse model related to SCA14 carrying a pseudosubstrate domain mutation in PKCγ shows perturbed Purkinje cell maturation and ataxic motor behavior
Show more Neurobiology of Disease
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Feedback
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2021 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.