Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Archive
    • Subject Collections
    • Meeting Collections
  • Reviews & Opinions
    • Editorials
    • Research News
    • Essays
    • Commentaries
    • Perspectives
    • Milestones in Physiology
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
  • Alerts
  • About
    • About JGP
    • History
    • Editors & Staff
    • Permissions & Licensing
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Publication Fees
    • Author Services
  • Subscriptions
  • Rockefeller University Press
  • JCB
  • JEM
  • JGP
  • LSA

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
JGP
  • Rockefeller University Press
  • JCB
  • JEM
  • JGP
  • LSA
  • Log in
JGP

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Archive
    • Subject Collections
    • Meeting Collections
  • Reviews & Opinions
    • Editorials
    • Research News
    • Essays
    • Commentaries
    • Perspectives
    • Milestones in Physiology
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
  • Alerts
  • About
    • About JGP
    • History
    • Editors & Staff
    • Permissions & Licensing
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Publication Fees
    • Author Services
  • Subscriptions

You are here

jgp Home » 2015 Archive » 1 April » 145 (4): 315
Research Article

Depression of voltage-activated Ca2+ release in skeletal muscle by activation of a voltage-sensing phosphatase

Christine Berthier, Candice Kutchukian, Clément Bouvard, Yasushi Okamura, Vincent Jacquemond
Christine Berthier
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR 5534, Université Lyon 1, Centre de Génétique et de Physiologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Candice Kutchukian
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR 5534, Université Lyon 1, Centre de Génétique et de Physiologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Clément Bouvard
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR 5534, Université Lyon 1, Centre de Génétique et de Physiologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yasushi Okamura
Laboratory of Integrative Physiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vincent Jacquemond
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR 5534, Université Lyon 1, Centre de Génétique et de Physiologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, 69100 Villeurbanne, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1085/jgp.201411309 | Published March 30, 2015
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Data supplements

  • Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental Material (PDF)
    • Video 1 -
      Successive confocal images of the mRFP fluorescence from a skeletal muscle fiber expressing Ci-VSP and PLCδ1PH-mRFP.The fiber was depolarized from −80 mV to the indicated levels. Frames were collected every 1.97 s and are displayed at a rate of four frames per second. Frame side size is 25.5 µm.
    • Video 2 -
      Successive confocal images of the mRFP fluorescence from a skeletal muscle fiber expressing Ci-VSP and PLCδ1PH-mRFP. The fiber was depolarized from −80 to 50 mV approximately between frame number 10 and frame number 12. Frames were collected every 2.35 s and are displayed at a rate of four frames per second. Frame side size is 51 µm.
  • Video Summary

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Expression of VSP in muscle fibers. Transmitted light images and corresponding confocal images of a portion of muscle fibers expressing Ci-VSP using the pIRES-EGFP plasmid (A) and Dr-VSP N-terminally tagged with EGFP (B). In B, the white trace superimposed on the green image shows the typical banded pattern of the fluorescence along the longitudinal axis of the fiber.

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

    Voltage-activated Ca2+ release in VSP-expressing fibers. (A) Line-scan images of depolarization-induced Ca2+ release in a VSP-negative fiber (left) and in a Ci-VSP–expressing fiber (right); fibers were depolarized from −80 to 10 mV (traces on top). (B) Ca2+ transients (rhod-2 F/F0, thick traces) and corresponding rate of Ca2+ release (thin red traces) in response to pulses from −80 mV to the indicated values. (C) Peak Ca2+ release versus voltage in VSP-negative fibers (n = 9) and in Ci-VSP–expressing fibers (n = 6). Error bars represent ± SEM. (D) Average Ca2+ release in response to a pulse from −80 to 10 mV in VSP-negative fibers (line) and in Ci-VSP–expressing fibers (blue squares).

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

    Ca2+ transients in VSP-expressing fibers depolarized by large pulses. (A) Voltage-pulse protocol. (B and C) Corresponding F/F0 rhod-2 traces in a Ci-VSP–negative and in a Ci-VSP–positive fiber, respectively. Arrows point to the F/F0 level 3 s after the onset of the pulse. (D) Mean values for the ratio of the initial peak rhod-2 Ca2+ transient in response to the pulse to 120 mV to the initial peak value in response to the pulse to 20 mV in VSP-negative (n = 11) and Ci-VSP–positive fibers (n = 8). (E) Mean values for the ratio of the rhod-2 Ca2+ level 3 s after the onset of the pulse to 120 mV to the corresponding value during the pulse to 20 mV. Error bars represent ± SEM. *, P ≤ 0.05.

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

    Ca2+ transients in response to trains of depolarizing steps in VSP-negative fibers and Ci-VSP–expressing fibers. (A) Control and test voltage-pulse protocols. (B and D) Rhod-2 F/F0 traces recorded in response to the protocols shown in A in a VSP-negative fiber and in a Ci-VSP–expressing fiber, respectively. The graphs on the right show the ratio of the successive peak F/F0 values during the test record to the corresponding values during the control record, plotted versus the pulse number during the protocols; values were normalized to the ratio value corresponding to the first Ca2+ transient. (C and E) Ca2+ release traces calculated from the above-corresponding rhod-2 transients. The graphs on the right show the ratio of the successive peak Ca2+ release values during the test record to the corresponding values during the control record, plotted versus the pulse number; values were normalized to the ratio value corresponding to the first Ca2+ transient. (F; left) Mean values for the normalized ratio of peak F/F0 during the test record to the corresponding peak F/F0 during the control record, versus the pulse number, in VSP-negative and in Ci-VSP–positive fibers. (Right) Corresponding mean values for the normalized ratio of peak Ca2+ release during the test record to the corresponding peak Ca2+ release during the control record. Error bars represent ± SEM.

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

    Membrane current during trains of depolarizing steps in VSP-negative fibers and Ci-VSP–expressing fibers. Mean value for the membrane current measured at the end of each depolarizing pulse during the control and test protocols shown in Fig. 4. The horizontal axis is positioned at the zero-current level. Error bars represent ± SEM.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Reversibility of the effect of VSP activation on trains of Ca2+ transients. (A) Pulse protocols that were successively applied. (B) F/F0 rhod-2 traces elicited in a Ci-VSP–expressing fiber challenged by the protocols shown in A. (C) Mean values for the peak F/F0 rhod-2 signals during the test 1, control 2, and test 2 records (n = 12 Ci-VSP–expressing fibers); in each fiber, successive peak F/F0 values were divided by the corresponding values for the same pulse number during the control 1 record. Error bars represent ± SEM.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7.

    Ca2+ transients in response to trains of depolarizing steps in Dr-VSP–expressing fibers. (A) Control and test voltage-pulse protocols. (B) Rhod-2 F/F0 traces recorded in response to the protocols shown in A in a Dr-VSP–positive fiber. (C) Mean values for the normalized ratio of peak F/F0 during the test record to the corresponding peak F/F0 during the control record, versus the pulse number in Dr-VSP–positive fibers (n = 7). Mean values for VSP-negative fibers are the same as in Fig. 4. Error bars represent ± SEM.

  • Figure 8.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8.

    Ca2+ current after strong depolarizing pulses in Ci-VSP–expressing fibers. In each panel, top traces show the two voltage-pulse protocols that were applied to the fiber; the protocol with prepulse to 120 mV (test) was bracketed by two protocols with prepulse to 20 mV (controls). (A–C) Superimposed membrane current records in response to the above shown protocols. Currents recorded during the two control protocols are in black, whereas current elicited by the test protocol is presented in red. In A, records are presented at both low (top) and high magnification (bottom). In B and C, only the high magnification views are presented. (D) Mean values for the ratio of Ca2+ current amplitude after the prepulse to 120 mV to its amplitude after the prepulse to 20 mV; values are plotted versus the pulse interval between the pre- and test pulses. Results are from seven VSP-negative and eight Ci-VSP–positive fibers. Error bars represent ± SEM.

  • Figure 9.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 9.

    PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence in fibers expressing Ci-VSP. (A) Confocal images of a portion of a muscle fiber expressing Ci-VSP using the pIRES-EGFP plasmid and PLCδ1PH-mRFP. The image on the right shows the PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence at higher magnification, and the graph below shows the fluorescence profile along the longitudinal axis of the highlighted rectangular region (yellow box). (B) Time course of change in PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence averaged over a given area of the fiber while applying 5-s-long depolarizing pulses according to the protocol shown on top (closed circles); superimposed time course of change in PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence measured subsequently over a nearby fiber area while no pulse was applied (open circles); synthetic trace generated from a two-exponential fit to the closed-circles record, using only the 20 first and 20 last values in the record for the fit (line). (C) Changes in fluorescence associated with the depolarizing pulse protocol after normalization by the record taken when no pulse was applied (closed circles); changes in fluorescence associated with the depolarizing-pulse protocol after normalization by the synthetic record (open circles).

  • Figure 10.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 10.

    Spatially segregated distinct changes in PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence upon strong membrane depolarization in fibers expressing Ci-VSP. (A) Confocal images of a portion of a muscle fiber expressing Ci-VSP and PLCδ1PH-mRFP. Images from left to right were taken before, during, and after a 5-s-long depolarizing pulse to 50 mV, respectively. The graph below each image shows the fluorescence intensity profile along the rectangular area highlighted in the image on the left. (B; left graph) Difference between the intensity at a given location of the fluorescence profile during the pulse (Fluo+50) and its corresponding intensity before the pulse (Fluo−80(1)) versus Fluo−80(1). (Right graph) Difference between the intensity at a given location of the fluorescence profile during the pulse (Fluo+50) and its corresponding intensity after the pulse (Fluo−80(2)) versus Fluo−80(2). (C) Result of the analysis similar to that shown in Fig. 9 C, except that pixels with high initial intensity and low initial intensity were separated; pixel selection was achieved by adjusting manually the threshold tool in ImageJ in the first image of the sequence. (D) Mean relative peak change in PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence versus membrane potential calculated from three fibers that experienced the pulse protocol shown in C; closed circles, open squares, and open circles correspond to values obtained using all, high intensity, and low intensity initial pixels, respectively. Error bars represent ± SEM.

  • Figure 11.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 11.

    Changes in PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence in Ci-VSP–expressing fibers during the train of depolarizing steps protocol. (A) PLCδ1PH-mRFP fluorescence detected in a fiber successively challenged by the above shown voltage-pulse protocols; fluorescence was measured in line-scan mode. The rightmost trace corresponds to the ratio of the sum of the two traces taken during a test train-pulse protocol and the sum of the two other traces. (B) Mean (±SEM; gray shading) change in fluorescence during the test protocol (n = 4); in each fiber, the fluorescence record during the test protocol was normalized by bracketing traces recorded while either applying no pulse or while applying a control protocol.

Previous articleNext article
Back to top
Download PDF
PDF + Supp Data
Citation Tools
Depression of voltage-activated Ca2+ release in skeletal muscle by activation of a voltage-sensing phosphatase
Christine Berthier, Candice Kutchukian, Clément Bouvard, Yasushi Okamura, Vincent Jacquemond
The Journal of General Physiology Apr 2015, 145 (4) 315-330; DOI: 10.1085/jgp.201411309

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address

Email logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo Reddit logo CiteULike logo LinkedIn logo

The Journal of General Physiology: 150 (4)

Current Issue

April 2, 2018
Volume 150, No. 4

  • Table of Contents
  • All Issues

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
 

ARTICLES

  • Current Issue
  • Newest Articles
  • Archive
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds

FOR AUTHORS

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Instructions for Authors

ABOUT

  • About JGP
  • Editors & Staff
  • Permissions & Licensing
  • Advertise
  • Feedback
  • Newsroom

CONNECT WITH JGP

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • Instagram

Online ISSN: 1540-7748
Print ISSN: 0022-1295

Copyright © 2018 JGP by Rockefeller University Press