α6β2*‐subtype nicotinic acetylcholine receptors are more sensitive than α4β2*‐subtype receptors to regulation by chronic nicotine administration

Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) of the α6β2* subtype (where *indicates the possible presence of additional subunits) are prominently expressed on dopaminergic neurons. Because of this, their role in tobacco use and nicotine dependence has received much attention. Previous studies have demonstrated that α6β2*‐nAChR are down‐regulated following chronic nicotine exposure (unlike other subtypes that have been investigated – most prominently α4β2* nAChR). This study examines, for the first time, effects across a comprehensive chronic nicotine dose range. Chronic nicotine dose–responses and quantitative ligand‐binding autoradiography were used to define nicotine sensitivity of changes in α4β2*‐nAChR and α6β2*‐nAChR expression. α6β2*‐nAChR down‐regulation by chronic nicotine exposure in dopaminergic and optic‐tract nuclei was ≈three‐fold more sensitive than up‐regulation of α4β2*‐nAChR. In contrast, nAChR‐mediated [³H]‐dopamine release from dopamine‐terminal region synaptosomal preparations changed only in response to chronic treatment with high nicotine doses, whereas dopaminergic parameters (transporter expression and activity, dopamine receptor expression) were largely unchanged. Functional measures in olfactory tubercle preparations were made for the first time; both nAChR expression levels and nAChR‐mediated functional measures changed differently between striatum and olfactory tubercles. These results show that functional changes measured using synaptosomal [³H]‐DA release are primarily owing to changes in nAChR, rather than in dopaminergic, function.

     

Progesterone modulation of α5 nAChR subunits influences anxiety‐related behavior during estrus cycle

Smokers often report an anxiolytic effect of cigarettes. In addition, stress‐related disorders such as anxiety, post‐traumatic stress syndrome and depression are often associated with chronic nicotine use. To study the role of the α5 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunit in anxiety‐related responses, control and α5 subunit null mice (α5^?/?) were subjected to the open field activity (OFA), light–dark box (LDB) and elevated plus maze (EPM) tests. In the OFA and LDB, α5^?/? behaved like wild‐type controls. In the EPM, female α5^?/? mice displayed an anxiolytic‐like phenotype, while male α5^?/? mice were undistinguishable from littermate controls. We studied the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis by measuring plasma corticosterone and hypothalamic corticotropin‐releasing factor. Consistent with an anxiolytic‐like phenotype, female α5^?/? mice displayed lower basal corticosterone levels. To test whether gonadal steroids regulate the expression of α5, we treated cultured NTera 2 cells with progesterone and found that α5 protein levels were upregulated. In addition, brain levels of α5 mRNA increased upon progesterone injection into ovariectomized wild‐type females. Finally, we tested anxiety levels in the EPM during the estrous cycle. The estrus phase (when progesterone levels are low) is anxiolytic‐like in wild‐type mice, but no cycle‐dependent fluctuations in anxiety levels were found in α5^?/? females. Thus, α5‐containing neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors may be mediators of anxiogenic responses, and progesterone‐dependent modulation of α5 expression may contribute to fluctuations in anxiety levels during the ovarian cycle.     

Differential physiologic responses of α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors to β‐amyloid1–40 and β‐amyloid1–42

The β‐amyloid peptides (Aβ), Aβ_1–40 and Aβ_1–42, have been implicated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. Although Aβ_1–42 is generally considered to be the pathological peptide in AD, both Aβ_1–40 and Aβ_1–42 have been used in a variety of experimental models without discrimination. Here we show that monomeric or oligomeric forms of the two Aβ peptides, when interact with the neuronal cation channel, α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (α7nAChR), would result in distinct physiologic responses as measured by acetylcholine release and calcium influx experiments. While Aβ_1–42 effectively attenuated these α7nAChR‐dependent physiology to an extent that was apparently irreversible, Aβ_1–40 showed a lower inhibitory activity that could be restored upon washings with physiologic buffers or treatment with α7nAChR antagonists. Our data suggest a clear pharmacological distinction between Aβ_1–40 and Aβ_1–42. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Neurobiol 55: 25–30, 2003     

Limitations of RNAi of α6 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunits for assessing the in vivo sensitivity to spinosad

Abstract Spinosad is a widely used insecticide that exerts its toxic effect primarily through interactions with the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. The α6 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunit is involved in spinosad toxicity as demonstrated by the high levels of resistance observed in strains lacking α6. RNAi was performed against the Dα6 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunit in Drosophila melanogaster using the Gal4‐UAS system to examine if RNAi would yield results similar to those of Dα6 null mutants. These Dα6‐deficient flies were subject to spinosad contact bioassays to evaluate the role of the Dα6 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunit on spinosad sensitivity. The expression of Dα6 was reduced 60%–75% as verified by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. However, there was no change in spinosad sensitivity in D. melanogaster. We repeated RNAi experiments in Tribolium castaneum using injection of dsRNA for Tcasα6. RNAi of Tcasα6 did not result in changes in spinosad sensitivity, similar to results obtained with D. melanogaster. The lack of change in spinosad sensitivity in both D. melanogaster and T. castaneum using two routes of dsRNA administration shows that RNAi may not provide adequate conditions to study the role of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunits on insecticide sensitivity due to the inability to completely eliminate expression of the α6 subunit in both species. Potential causes for the lack of change in spinosad sensitivity are discussed.