Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology
Research Article

Elementary response triggered by transducin in retinal rods

Wendy W. S. Yue, Daniel Silverman, Xiaozhi Ren, Rikard Frederiksen, Kazumi Sakai, Takahiro Yamashita, Yoshinori Shichida, M. Carter Cornwall, View ORCID ProfileJeannie Chen, and King-Wai Yau
PNAS March 12, 2019 116 (11) 5144-5153; first published February 22, 2019; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817781116
Wendy W. S. Yue
aSolomon H. Snyder Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
bCenter for Sensory Biology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
cBiochemistry, Cellular and Molecular Biology Graduate Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Silverman
aSolomon H. Snyder Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
bCenter for Sensory Biology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
cBiochemistry, Cellular and Molecular Biology Graduate Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Xiaozhi Ren
aSolomon H. Snyder Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
bCenter for Sensory Biology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rikard Frederiksen
dDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA 02118;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kazumi Sakai
eDepartment of Biophysics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Takahiro Yamashita
eDepartment of Biophysics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yoshinori Shichida
eDepartment of Biophysics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan;
fResearch Organization for Science and Technology, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga 525-8577, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M. Carter Cornwall
dDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA 02118;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeannie Chen
gZilkha Neurogenetic Institute, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089;
hDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jeannie Chen
King-Wai Yau
aSolomon H. Snyder Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
bCenter for Sensory Biology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205;
iDepartment of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: kwyau@jhmi.edu
  1. Contributed by King-Wai Yau, January 16, 2019 (sent for review October 17, 2018; reviewed by Petri Ala-Laurila and Theodore G. Wensel)

This article has a Letter. Please see:

  • Phototransduction gain at the G-protein, transducin, and effector protein, phosphodiesterase-6, stages in retinal rods - April 30, 2019

See related content:

  • Reply to Heck et al.: Signal amplification at the rhodopsin-to-transducin·phosphodiesterase step in rod phototransduction
    - Apr 30, 2019
  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & SI

Figures

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

    Characterization of RhoREY/REY;Gcaps−/− retinae and heterologously expressed REY-Rho. (A) Paraffin sections of 2-mo-old WT (Left) and REY (Right) retinae stained by H&E. (B) Paraffin sections of 2-mo-old WT (Top) and REY (Bottom) retinae immunostained for rhodopsin. DAPI marks the outer nuclear layer. (C) Extinction coefficients of WT-Rho (solid black trace) and REY-Rho (solid gray trace) measured by in vitro spectrophotometry. Acid denaturation (dashed traces; SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods) confirmed that both pigments were present at the same amount. Two other experiments gave similar measurements for REY-Rho. (D) Absorption spectra of WT (Top) and REY (Bottom) rods measured by in situ microspectrophotometry (SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods; mean ± SD; n = 8). (E) Western blots showing the expression levels of various phototransduction components in extracts of WT (Left) and REY (Right) retinae. ARR1, arrestin isoform 1; CNGA1 and CNGB1, A1 and B1 subunit of the rod CNG channel, respectively; GRK1, G protein receptor kinase isoform 1; GTα, GTβ, and GTγ, α, β, and γ subunit of GT, respectively; PDE6, rod phosphodiesterase isoform 6; RetGC1, retinal guanylate cyclase isoform 1; RGS9, regulator of G protein signaling isoform 9. GAPDH was used as control for protein concentration in total extracts.

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

    Photoresponses of REY rods. (A) Response families of a WT rod (Left) and a REY rod (Right), both in Gcaps−/− background. WT was exposed to 500-nm light; REY to white light because of its weak sensitivity. Averaged responses to 10-ms flashes at time 0 are shown. (B) Superimposed responses of a hOpn1lwTg;RhoREY/REY;Gcaps−/− rod (red) and a REY rod (gray) to flashes of the same set of intensities at 560 nm (λmax of transgenic red cone pigment). Averaged responses to 30-ms flashes at time 0 are shown. (Inset) Small averaged responses (mean ± SD) of hOpn1lwTg;RhoREY/REY;Gcaps−/− (red, n = 6), WT (black, n = 15), and REY (gray, n = 11) rods, overlaid and normalized at peak for kinetics comparisons. Absolute amplitudes are 0.95 pA, 1.93 pA, and 1.58 pA, respectively. (C) Intensity–response relations of WT (black, n = 8) and REY (gray, n = 16) rods. Fitting with a single saturating-exponential function gave half-saturating flash strengths (ρ) of 6.21 and 46,168 (equivalent 500-nm) photons⋅μm−2 for WT and REY rods, respectively. Data points are means ± SD.

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

    Estimate of single-GT*·PDE* effect from REY-Rho* responses. (A, Top) Responses of a WT rod (Left) and a REY rod (Right) to repetitive 10-ms, 500-nm flashes (vertical bars). For REY rods, multiple single-G*·PDE* effects were elicited at the chosen intensity, and therefore the probability of observing failures was low. (A, Bottom) Square of the ensemble mean (black on left; gray on right) overlaid on the ensemble variance (purple) of the responses. The cells are the same as at Top. Ratio between ensemble variance and ensemble mean allows estimation of the unitary response amplitude (Methods and SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods). (B, Bottom) Peak amplitudes of unitary responses of rods with WT (Left) or REY (Right) rhodopsin plotted against the mean response peak. The Grk1S561L (red on left; pink on right) and Grk1+/− (light green on left; dark green on right) mutations were used to shorten and lengthen Rho* lifetime, respectively (see text). Each open symbol represents one cell, with identical symbols representing the same cell being stimulated at multiple intensities. Solid circles are means ± SD. Brackets denote pairwise Student’s t tests on quantal response amplitudes with 0.0001 ≤ P < 0.05 and P < 0.0001 marked by single and double asterisks, respectively. No statistically significant differences between genotypes on right (P = 0.35 between Grk1S561L;RhoREY/REY;Gcaps−/− and REY; P = 0.91 between Grk1+/−;RhoREY/REY;Gcaps−/− and REY). (B, Top) Averaged single-photon–response profiles of rods of the corresponding genotypes (see SI Appendix, Table S1 for kinetics measurements). (C) Similar to B but with genetic manipulation on GTα. The genotype Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/− reduces GTα expression to ∼6% of WT (Fig. 4). The difference between genotypes on right is not statistically significant (P = 0.20).

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

    Generation and characterization of Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/− mice. (A) Construct design for the generation of Gnat1Tg mice. (B) Western blot quantification of GTα protein in Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− retinae. Dilution of WT protein extracts produced a calibration curve for comparison in band intensities with Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− (SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods). GTα protein is expressed at ∼6% of WT in Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− retinae. Similar results were produced in several other experiments. (C) Intensity–response relations of WT (black, n = 8; reproduced from Fig. 2C) and Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− (blue, n = 12) rods. Fitting with a single saturating-exponential function gave half-saturating flash strengths (ρ) of 6.21 and 24.32 (equivalent 500-nm) photons⋅μm−2 for the two genotypes, respectively. Data points are means ± SD. (D) Absorption spectra of Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− (Left) and Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoREY/REY;Gcaps−/− (Right) rods measured by in situ microspectrophotometry (SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods) show a normal absorption maximum of rhodopsin (cf. Fig. 1D). The reason for the lower expression levels of rhodopsin in the latter line is unclear, but this does not affect the fluctuation analysis (mean ± SD; n = 8). (E) Western blots showing the expression levels of various phototransduction components in retinal extracts from the indicated genotypes. The data for WT and REY are reproduced here from Fig. 1E for comparison.

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

    Postbleach noise from Opn* in RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− rods. (A) Noise recording before and after bleaching ∼1% of rhodopsin in a WT rod. (B, Left) Recordings from two different rods stored in darkness for >1 hr, showing steady current fluctuations (continuous noise) and occasional discrete events (marked with stars). (Right) Recordings from different rods after a 5% bleach and kept in darkness for 70 min, 140 min, or with similar bleach treatment, but subsequently incubated in 11-cis-retinal (SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods). (C) Steady–dark-current mean (Top) and continuous noise variance (Bottom) after a 5% bleach (blue), and after a 5% bleach followed by 11-cis-retinal incubation (green) for comparison with dark control rods (black). Each symbol represents a single cell. Solid lines show the cohort mean for each condition. From pairwise Student’s t tests, we found a significant difference in noise variance between dark control and post-5% bleach rods (P < 0.0001) and between post-5% bleach rods and regenerated rods (P < 0.0001), but not between dark control rods and regenerated rods (P = 0.26). Correspondingly, there was a significant difference in dark-current mean between dark control and post-5% bleach rods (0.0001 ≤ P < 0.05) and between post-5% bleach rods and regenerated rods (0.0001 ≤ P < 0.05), but not between dark control rods and regenerated rods (P = 0.82). (D, Left) Cohort-averaged continuous-noise power spectra from dark control rods (black) and from post-5% bleach rods (blue). Each frequency point indicates cohort mean ± SEM (n = 5 rods). (Middle and Right) Difference spectrum and waveform of the unitary Opn* effect (transient peak normalized to unity) extracted from the difference spectrum by fitting with the spectrum of a convolution of two single-exponential declines (blue curve, τ1 = 81 ± 35 msec, τ2 = 231 ± 25 msec, n = 5 rods).

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

    Unitary GT*·PDE* events underlying constitutive Opn*-triggered activity in RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− rods. (A) Waveform of unitary Opn* effects after a 1%, 5%, or 8% bleach (transient peak normalized to unity) extracted from difference spectra as in Fig. 5D (time constants in SI Appendix, Table S2). (B, Left) Unitary amplitudes of Opn-triggered events underlying postbleach noise after different bleaches of WT rods, derived from noise analysis (SI Appendix, Supplementary Methods). There was not a significant difference in amplitude across all bleaching conditions (P = 0.27, one-way ANOVA). Dashed line is the population mean amplitude from all bleach levels (each symbol represents a single cell). (B, Right) Cellular rate of events after different bleaches with percentage of total pigment content indicated below. Dashed line is a linear regression line passing through the origin (R2 = 0.8) with slope giving a molecular rate constant of 8.6 × 10−6 events⋅s−1⋅Opn−1. (C) Waveform of unitary Opn* effects after a 20% or 30% bleach (transient peak normalized to unity) extracted from difference spectra as in Fig. 5D, but with the Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− line (time constants in SI Appendix, Table S2). (D, Top) Recordings from dark control (Left), 5%-bleached (Middle), and 8%-bleached (Right) rods from RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− mice. (D, Bottom) Similar recordings from dark control (Left), 20%-bleached (Middle), and 30%-bleached Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− rods with reduced GTα expression. Zero-current axes are aligned to illustrate the approximate magnitude of the change in dark current after bleaching. (E) Same analysis as B but with Gnat1Tg;Gnat1−/−;RhoWT/WT;Gcaps−/− rods after a 20% or 30% bleach. (Left) Unitary amplitudes of Opn-triggered events were not significantly different from WT rods (P = 0.34, one-way ANOVA), and (Right) the event rate increased approximately in proportion to the amount of Opn formed (R2 = 0.8, molecular rate constant = 1.5 × 10−6 s−1⋅Opn−1). (F) Averaged single-photon responses from WT-Rho* in dark-adapted WT rods as well as after a 1%, 5%, and 8% bleach.

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

    Comparison of individual GT*·PDE* effects with the unitary WT-Rho* response. (A, Left) Ensemble averages of single-GT*·PDE* effect profiles produced by WT-Opn* (n = 15) after a 5% bleach and by REY-Rho* in REY rods (n = 10). (A, Right) Ensemble average of the unitary WT-Rho* response in dark-adapted WT rods (n = 23). All measurements were in the Gcaps−/− background for facilitating analysis of small responses. (B) Time-integrated profiles of single-GT*·PDE* effects and the single-WT-Rho* response. Each open symbol represents a single cell. Closed symbols are means ± SD. The time-integrated single-GT*·PDE* effects from all conditions were all within a range approximately an order of magnitude lower than that of the single-photon response from WT-Rho*. There was not a significant difference in values when comparing time-integrated profiles of single-GT*·PDE* effects from REY-Rho* with those from WT-Opn (P = 0.21, Student’s t test).

Data supplements

  • Supporting Information

    • Download Appendix (PDF)
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Elementary response triggered by transducin in retinal rods
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Elementary response triggered by transducin in retinal rods
Wendy W. S. Yue, Daniel Silverman, Xiaozhi Ren, Rikard Frederiksen, Kazumi Sakai, Takahiro Yamashita, Yoshinori Shichida, M. Carter Cornwall, Jeannie Chen, King-Wai Yau
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2019, 116 (11) 5144-5153; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1817781116

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Elementary response triggered by transducin in retinal rods
Wendy W. S. Yue, Daniel Silverman, Xiaozhi Ren, Rikard Frederiksen, Kazumi Sakai, Takahiro Yamashita, Yoshinori Shichida, M. Carter Cornwall, Jeannie Chen, King-Wai Yau
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2019, 116 (11) 5144-5153; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1817781116
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 116 (11)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Article Classifications

  • Biological Sciences
  • Neuroscience

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Methods
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Surgeons hands during surgery
Inner Workings: Advances in infectious disease treatment promise to expand the pool of donor organs
Despite myriad challenges, clinicians see room for progress.
Image credit: Shutterstock/David Tadevosian.
Setting sun over a sun-baked dirt landscape
Core Concept: Popular integrated assessment climate policy models have key caveats
Better explicating the strengths and shortcomings of these models will help refine projections and improve transparency in the years ahead.
Image credit: Witsawat.S.
Double helix
Journal Club: Noncoding DNA shown to underlie function, cause limb malformations
Using CRISPR, researchers showed that a region some used to label “junk DNA” has a major role in a rare genetic disorder.
Image credit: Nathan Devery.
Steamboat Geyser eruption.
Eruption of Steamboat Geyser
Mara Reed and Michael Manga explore why Yellowstone's Steamboat Geyser resumed erupting in 2018.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Multi-color molecular model
Enzymatic breakdown of PET plastic
A study demonstrates how two enzymes—MHETase and PETase—work synergistically to depolymerize the plastic pollutant PET.
Image credit: Aaron McGeehan (artist).

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490