Advertisement

Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease

, Volume 41, Issue 6, pp 1093–1101 | Cite as

Setting the stage for a role of the postsynaptic proteome in inherited neurometabolic disorders

  • Àlex BayésEmail author
Open Access
Review
  • 292 Downloads

Abstract

Neurotransmitter diseases are a well-defined group of metabolic conditions caused, in most instances, by genes specifically expressed in the presynaptic button. Better understanding of presynaptic molecular physiology, both in normal and pathological conditions, should help develop therapeutical strategies. The clinical relevance of the presynapse in inherited metabolic disorders is in glaring contrast with that of the postsynaptic component, which so far does not seem to play a relevant role in these disorders. This is somewhat surprising, as postsynaptic proteins are known to be involved in many nervous system diseases, particularly in neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders. The goal of this article is to explore if defects in the sophisticated postsynaptic machinery could also have a role in neurometabolic disorders.

Introduction

Synapses are pivotal in cognition and behaviour, as they decode and store sensorial information. For this reason, they are very often involved in the pathophysiology of mental disorders. Synapses are typically divided in three compartments: the presynaptic button, the synaptic cleft and the postsynaptic element. The postsynaptic element of glutamatergic synapses, which represent the vast majority of central nervous system synapses (Beaulieu and Colonnier 1985; von Bohlen Und Halbach 2009; Defelipe et al. 2002), has a unique morphology, which is essential to its function. This structure was first described by Santiago Ramón y Cajal who named it ‘dendritic spine’ (Yuste 2015). Dendritic spines are dynamic protrusions of the postsynaptic membrane that present a bulbous head connected to the dendritic shaft through a thin neck (von Bohlen Und Halbach 2009). Another characteristic feature of dendritic spines is the presence of a very large protein complex beneath the postsynaptic membrane, the postsynaptic density (PSD). Recent large-scale proteomics experiments have produced a very detailed catalogue of the proteins which are present at the PSD, identifying hundreds of different proteins (Bayés and Grant 2009; Bayés et al. 2012, 2017; Distler et al. 2014; Focking et al. 2016; Roy et al. 2018). Paramount among PSD proteins are neurotransmitter receptors, which mediate the propagation of the incoming action potentials. Nevertheless, the PSD contains many other protein types, which participate in the translation of the electrical input into chemical signals, which ultimately drive the functional state of the synapse (Boeckers 2006; Kim and Sheng 2009; Sheng and Kim 2011; Dosemeci et al. 2016).

Neurotransmitter disorders are a group of inherited neurometabolic syndromes that are primarily caused by an altered bioavailability of neurotransmitter at the synapse (Pearl et al. 2007; Hoffman and Blau 2014; Marecos et al. 2014; Ng et al. 2015; Cortès-Saladelafont et al. 2016). They are generally caused by pathogenic mutations in genes expressed at the axon terminal. These code for enzymes involved in the synthesis or degradation of neurotransmitters. Nevertheless, genes coding for proteins responsible for neurotransmitter release and reuptake have also been reported mutated in these conditions. The presynaptic space has thus an important role in neurometabolic disorders. Pathophysiological descriptions of neuronal dysfunction in many other classic inborn errors of metabolism (intoxication disorders, energy defects and complex molecule defects) have been mainly described from a presynaptic perspective. This circumstance is in strong contrast with our understanding of the postsynaptic role in neurometabolic disorders. In this article, I explore what is known about the main metabolic pathways functioning at the postsynapse and their potential relevance in the field of neurometabolic disorders.

Postsynaptic metabolic pathways

A close inspection to the postsynaptic proteome should readily inform us about the key metabolic pathways operating in it. To achieve this purpose, I have looked for molecular pathways in a reference PSD proteome (Bayés et al. 2017) using the information contained in the ‘Reactome Pathways Database’ (Fabregat et al. 2018). The bioinformatics analysis tools provided by ‘Panther Classification System’ (Mi et al. 2016) have been used to identify metabolic pathways significantly enriched in the PSD, as previously reported (Bayés et al. 2012; Reig-Viader et al. 2018). If a pathway is significantly enriched in the PSD, it means that it presents a higher number of components than would be expected by chance. The vast majority of pathways that have been identified in this exercise are intracellular signal transduction pathways (see Supplementary Table 1), which is in accordance with our current knowledge of the molecular characteristics of the postsynaptic proteome (Boeckers 2006; Kim and Sheng 2009; Sheng and Kim 2011; Bayés et al. 2012; Dosemeci et al. 2016). These pathways typically involve the activation of membrane receptors, G-proteins or small GTPases that result in a series of molecular events, mostly phosphorylation cascades, which ultimately promote changes in cellular physiology. Nevertheless, a number of canonical metabolic pathways could be identified in the postsynaptic machinery. These are primarily related to the energetic and protein metabolisms (Table 1). However, if one considers the expanded definition of inborn errors of metabolism (IEM), in which dysfunctions of protein traffic are also regarded as metabolic conditions (García-Cazorla and Saudubray, this issue), the list of postsynaptic metabolic pathways is extended (Table 1 and Fig. 1). Interestingly, this analysis also revealed that while the presynaptic button presents a set of specific metabolic pathways, the postsynaptic element does not seem to contain a similarly unique metabolism. With the exception of a pathway involved in the trafficking of α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoazolepropionic (AMPA) glutamate receptors, postsynaptic metabolic pathways underlay basic cellular functions. This is relevant, as it means that proteins involved in these processes are not unique to the postsynapse and thus a direct link between a mutation and a postsynaptic role in disease would not be straightforward.
Table 1

Postsynaptic metabolic pathways

Pathway name

Pathway code

Postsynaptic proteins in pathway

Energetic metabolism

 Glycolysis

R-MMU-70171

9

 Translocation of GLUT4 to the plasma membrane

R-MMU-1445148

38

Protein metabolism

 Protein translation

R-MMU-72766

62

 Chaperonin-mediated protein folding

R-MMU-390466

22

 Different proteasome pathways

R-MMU-5610785; R-MMU-195253; R-MMU-5610780

33

Endocytosis and traffic of neurotransmitter receptors

 Trafficking of AMPA receptors

R-MMU-399719

25

 Clathrin-mediated endocytosis

R-MMU-8856828

43

Fig. 1

Schematic representation of a glutamatergic synapse indicating major metabolic pathways identified in the postsynaptic proteome. Proteomic evidence suggests that the glucose transporters GLUT1 and GLUT3  as well as the entire glycolytic pathway (represented as a yellow circle) would be present at the postsynaptic site. Confirmation of this observation with alternative methodological approaches would be required to confidently locate the glycolytic pathway within the PSD. Polysomes, for protein synthesis, and the proteasome, for protein degradation, are shown to represent the enrichment in the PSD of pathways related to protein metabolism. Finally, the traffic of AMPA receptors in and out of the postsynaptic membrane is also shown, indicating the endocytic zones where clathrin-mediated endocytosis of AMPA receptors occurs

Energetic metabolism at the postsynapse

The presence at the presynaptic button of glucose transporters, glycolytic enzymes and mitochondria is well documented (Jang et al. 2016; Ashrafi et al. 2017). These importantly contribute to the energetic demands posed by presynaptic activity (Harris et al. 2012; Rangaraju et al. 2014). On the other hand, our understanding of the energetic machinery present at the postsynaptic side is by no means well established. The existence of glucose transporters and glycolytic enzymes in the postsynapse is still controversial. Furthermore, mitochondria do not have access to dendritic spines, remaining in dendritic shafts (Li et al. 2004; von Bohlen Und Halbach 2009). Actually, mitochondrial ATP is thought to freely diffuse into the spine head (von Bohlen Und Halbach 2009), instead of being actively transported there. This is particularly puzzling if we consider that most brain energy is consumed by synapses, and within synapses, restoring the postsynaptic membrane potential alone requires 50% of all its energetic demand (Attwell and Laughlin 2001; Harris et al. 2012).

Several PSD proteomics experiments have identified glucose transporters 1 (GLUT1) and 3 (GLUT3), the former being more frequently reported (Fernandez et al. 2009; Bayés et al. 2011, 2012, 2017; Distler et al. 2014; Focking et al. 2016). Other glucose transporters are normally not found in proteomic analyses of postsynaptic preparations. Nevertheless, these studies commonly find GLUT1 and GLUT3 in low amounts, so that, without evidence from other methodological approaches, their location at the postsynapse remains somewhat uncertain. The literature on brain cells expressing GLUT1 is neither fully conclusive. While there is evidence that GLUT1 is expressed in blood vessels and astrocytes, its expression in neurons cannot be discarded (Leino et al. 1997; Simpson et al. 2007; Jurcovicova 2014). Instead, the expression of GLUT3 in neurons is well documented (Leino et al. 1997; Simpson et al. 2007; Jurcovicova 2014). The presence of GLUT3 at synapses has been confirmed by an immunofluorescence co-localisation experiment, although its precise sub-synaptic location (pre- vs. postsynaptic) could not be fully established (Ferreira et al. 2011).

Proteomics experiments also report glycolytic enzymes at the PSD (Fernandez et al. 2009; Bayés et al. 2011, 2012, 2017; Distler et al. 2014; Focking et al. 2016). Actually, these articles usually identify the complete set of glycolytic enzymes. Nevertheless, to the best of my knowledge, the location at the PSD of glycolytic enzymes has only been proven once using other experimental approaches (Wu et al. 1997). In this seminal article, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) was localised to the PSD by electron microscopy using specific antibodies. Furthermore, the activity of phosphoglycerate kinase (PGK), GAPDH and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was measured in biochemical preparations of postsynaptic densities proving that ATP can be synthesised at the PSD. This pioneer work suggests that some of the ATP consumed at the PSD would be locally produced via glycolysis, instead of coming from dendritic mitochondria. They also suggest that some postsynaptic functions require an instant and spatially controlled supply of ATP. As it occurs in synaptic vesicles, which contain both GAPDH and PGK that produce ATP in a highly localised manner for efficient neurotransmitter loading (Ikemoto et al. 2003). Further research will be required to completely clarify if glycolytic enzymes play a relevant function at the PSD, and if their malfunction could have a role in disease. Besides glycolysis, the pathway ‘Translocation of GLUT4 to the plasma membrane’ has also been found enriched among PSD proteins (Table 1). Out of the 67 proteins that constitute this pathway, 38 are at the PSD, representing a sixfold enrichment from what would be expected by chance (Fisher’s exact test p = 9.5 E-14, Supplementary Table 1). Nonetheless, it is important to remark that GLUT4 is not found in the postsynaptic proteome, neither has it ever been localised to dendritic spines using alternative experimental approaches. Thus, these 38 proteins might be involved in the traffic of other glucose transporters.

Finally, the postsynaptic proteome presents many proteins involved in the Krebs cycle and oxidative phosphorylation (see Supplementary Table 1), two metabolic processes that occur within mitochondria although, as has been already mentioned, these are absent from the postsynaptic compartment. Nevertheless, the presence of contaminating mitochondria in biochemical preparations of the PSD is as well documented as difficult to avoid (Carlin et al. 1980). Mitochondrial proteins, and the pathways they are involved in, are not considered as true components of the PSD.

Protein metabolism at the postsynapse

Protein synthesis is required for the long-term changes in synaptic plasticity that underpin the formation of long-lasting memories (De Robertis and Bennett 1954; Palade and Palay 1954; Gray 1959; Martin et al. 2000). One of the first indications that proteins are synthesised outside the cell soma was actually obtained from the observation of polysomes at neuronal dendrites, close to postsynaptic spines (Steward and Levy 1982; Spacek 1985). Later, polysomes were shown to selectively enter dendritic spines that had been stimulated to produce a long-term potentiation (Ostroff et al. 2002). On the bases of all these findings, it should not come as a surprise that several molecular pathways related to protein metabolism appear as enriched at the postsynapse (Table 1 and Fig. 1). These include pathways involved in protein translation but also pathways important for protein turnover, such as ‘Chaperonin-mediated protein folding’ and protein degradation via the proteasome. The control of protein degradation by the ubiquitin proteasome pathway is tightly regulated at postsynaptic dendritic spines (Ehlers 2003). As it occurs for polysomes, the proteasome complex also displays a dynamic localisation between dendritic shafts and spines, which is under the control of synaptic activity (Bingol and Schuman 2006).

Traffic of AMPA glutamate receptors and postsynaptic endocytosis

AMPA glutamate receptors (AMPAR) are the main drivers of fast excitatory neurotransmission. As a general rule, an increase in AMPAR at the synapse results in synaptic potentiation, while the opposite results in synaptic depression (Shepherd and Huganir 2007). Thus, their traffic in and out of the postsynaptic membrane is tightly regulated (Anggono and Huganir 2012). The insertion of AMPARs in the postsynaptic membrane occurs via exocytosis of cytosolic vesicles containing these receptors and later lateral diffusion towards the PSD. Similarly, endocytosis is required to remove AMPAR from the synapse. The areas of endocytosis at dendritic spines have been termed endocytic zones (Racz et al. 2004); these promote clathrin-mediated endocytosis of AMPARs and other cargo leaving the synapse. Proteins involved in AMPAR traffic and clathrin-mediated endocytosis are involved in the last two metabolic pathways characteristic of the postsynaptic machinery (Table 1). Because of the specialised machinery involved in AMPAR traffic, this pathway is likely to be the only metabolic pathway really specific to the postsynaptic proteome.

Postsynaptic metabolic disorders

As previously introduced, neurometabolic disorders are intimately associated with presynaptic physiology. The notion of postsynaptic metabolic disorders is, at this point, rather speculative, with hardly any scientific literature supporting it. It is plausible that neurotransmitter diseases will secondarily alter postsynaptic physiology. Actually, this has already been reported for the creatine transporter deficiency, which results in increased synaptic levels of creatine and a prolonged stimulation of GABA receptors, to which the postsynaptic neuron responds by reducing the number of inhibitory synapses (Salomons et al. 2003). Similar pathophysiological mechanisms have been shown for the SSADHD deficiency (Pearl et al. 2009; Reis et al. 2012). Nevertheless, in this section, I wish to explore if there is evidence suggesting that primary dysfunction of the postsynaptic metabolic pathways described above could be involved in neurological conditions. To achieve this goal, we have looked for those genes coding for proteins involved in postsynaptic metabolic pathways that when mutated cause inherited brain conditions. It is important to keep in mind that most postsynaptic metabolic pathways are not exclusive to the postsynapse. Thus, their mutation will not necessarily imply a clinically relevant affectation of the postsynaptic physiology.

Fifty-three PSD proteins involved in metabolic pathways cause inherited disease

The ‘Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man’ (OMIM) database (McKusick 2007) was first used to identify proteins from postsynaptic metabolic pathways causing disease. I later gathered the individual symptoms that constitute these conditions from the ‘Human Phenotype Ontology’ (HPO) database (Köhler et al. 2017), which systematically brakes down clinical conditions into their main symptoms (or phenotypes). According to OMIM, of the 232 PSD proteins involved in postsynaptic metabolic pathways, 53 cause inherited clinical disorders. Table 2 lists these proteins with the name of the disease they are involved in. As some genes cause more than one condition, the total number of medical conditions caused by these 53 genes raises to 60.
Table 2

Proteins involved in postsynaptic metabolic pathways that cause inherited diseases

Pathway

Gene name

Disease (OMIM)

OMIM ID

Energetic metabolism

 Glycolysis (including glucose transporters)

 

ALDOA

GLYCOGEN STORAGE DISEASE XII

611881

 

HK1

NEUROPATHY, HEREDITARY MOTOR AND SENSORY, RUSSE TYPE

605285

 

PFKM

GLYCOGEN STORAGE DISEASE VII

232800

 

SLC2A1

GLUT1 DEFICIENCY SYNDROME 2

612126

 

TPI1

TRIOSEPHOSPHATE ISOMERASE DEFICIENCY

615512

 Translocation of GLUT4 to the plasma membrane

 

MYH9 (1)

SEBASTIAN SYNDROME

605249

 

MYO5A

GRISCELLI SYNDROME, TYPE 1

214450

 

TUBA4A

AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS 22

616208

 

TUBA8

CORTICAL DYSPLASIA, COMPLEX, WITH OTHER BRAIN MALFORMATIONS 8

613180

 

TUBB2A

CORTICAL DYSPLASIA, COMPLEX, WITH OTHER BRAIN MALFORMATIONS 5

615763

 

TUBB2B

CORTICAL DYSPLASIA, COMPLEX, WITH OTHER BRAIN MALFORMATIONS 7

610031

 

TUBB3

FIBROSIS OF EXTRAOCULAR MUSCLES, CONGENITAL, 3A

600638

 

YWHAE

MILLER-DIEKER LISSENCEPHALY SYNDROME

247200

 

YWHAG

EPILEPTIC ENCEPHALOPATHY, EARLY INFANTILE, 56

617665

Protein metabolism

 Protein translation

 

RPL21

HYPOTRICHOSIS 12

615885

 

RPL26

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 11

614900

 

RPS10

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 9

613308

 

RPS19

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 1

105650

 

RPS28

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 15

606164

 

RPS29

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 13

615909

 

RPS14

CHROMOSOME 5q DELETION SYNDROME

153550

 

RPL11

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 7

612562

 

RPL35A

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 5

612528

 

RPS23

BRACHYCEPHALY, TRICHOMEGALY, AND DEVELOPMENTAL DELAY

617412

 

RPL5

DIAMOND-BLACKFAN ANEMIA 6

612561

 Chaperonin-mediated protein folding

 

CCT5

NEUROPATHY, HEREDITARY SENSORY, WITH SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA

256840

 

CSNK2A1

OKUR-CHUNG NEURODEVELOPMENTAL SYNDROME

617062

 

GNAI2

VENTRICULAR TACHYCARDIA, FAMILIAL

192605

 

GNAI3

AURICULOCONDYLAR SYNDROME 1

602483

 

GNAO1

NEURODEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER WITH INVOLUNTARY MOVEMENTS

617493

 

GNAO1

EPILEPTIC ENCEPHALOPATHY, EARLY INFANTILE, 17

615473

 

GNB3

NIGHT BLINDNESS, CONGENITAL STATIONARY, TYPE 1H

617024

 

GNB4

CHARCOT-MARIE-TOOTH DISEASE

615185

 

GNB5

LANGUAGE DELAY AND ATTENTION DEFICIT-HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER

617182

 

RGS9

PROLONGED ELECTRORETINAL RESPONSE SUPPRESSION

608415

 Different proteasome pathways

 

APC

FAMILIAL ADENOMATOUS POLYPOSIS 1

175100

 

CTNNB1

MENTAL RETARDATION, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 19

615075

 

PPP2R1A

MENTAL RETARDATION, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 36

616362

Endocytosis and traffic of neurotransmitter receptors

 Trafficking of AMPA receptors

 

AP2S1 (2)

HYPOCALCIURIC HYPERCALCEMIA, FAMILIAL, TYPE III

600740

 

CACNG2

MENTAL RETARDATION, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 10

614256

 

CAMK2A

MENTAL RETARDATION, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 53

617798

 

CAMK2B

MENTAL RETARDATION, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 54

617799

 

EPB4.1 L1

MENTAL RETARDATION, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 11

614257

 

GRIA3

MENTAL RETARDATION, X-LINKED, SYNDROMIC, WU TYPE

300699

 

GRIA4

NEURODEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER WITH OR WITHOUT SEIZURES AND GAIT ABNORMALITIES

617864

 

GRIP1

FRASER SYNDROME 3

617667

 

MYO6

DEAFNESS, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 22

606346

 

PRKCG

RETINITIS PIGMENTOSA 11

600138

 

PRKCG

SPINOCEREBELLAR ATAXIA 14

605361

 Clathrin-mediated endocytosis

 

ACTB (3)

BARAITSER-WINTER SYNDROME 1

243310

 

ACTG1 (3)

BARAITSER-WINTER SYNDROME 2

614583

 

DNM2

CHARCOT-MARIE-TOOTH DISEASE

606482

 

NECAP1

EPILEPTIC ENCEPHALOPATHY, EARLY INFANTILE, 21

615833

 

PIP5K1C

LETHAL CONGENITAL CONTRACTURE SYNDROME 3

611369

 

WNT5A

ROBINOW SYNDROME, AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT 1

189700

(1) This gene causes six different syndromes with similar phenotypes, none of which are of a clear neurological nature

(2) AP2S1 is also in the group of proteins implicated in ‘Clathrin-mediated endocytosis’

(3) ACTB and ACTG1 are also in the group of proteins implicated in ‘Translocation of GLUT4 to the plasma membrane’

Most inherited diseases caused by metabolism proteins in the PSD show neurological symptoms

The phenotypic information obtained from HPO allowed us to identify those clinical conditions from OMIM that present neurological manifestations. Interestingly, of all 60 disorders, only eight did not cause neurological symptoms (Supplementary Table 2 and Table 3). This indicates that the majority of these proteins perform important functions in the brain and may be also at the postsynaptic level. The list of identified disorders includes (i) eight forms of intellectual disabilities, (ii) three epileptic encephalopathies, (iii) three neurodevelopmental conditions, (iv) three types of cortical dysplasia and (v) one lissencephaly, as well as neuropathies such as Charcot-Marie-Tooth diseases (Supplementary Table 2). When looking at disease types caused by proteins involved in the same metabolic pathways, we see that (i) large brain malformations such as cortical dysplasias and lissencephaly are caused by proteins—mostly tubulins—involved in the pathway ‘Translocation of GLUT4 to the plasma membrane’ and (ii) intellectual disabilities are very common among proteins involved in ‘Trafficking of AMPA receptors’, which is likely the pathway most specific to postsynaptic function. Finally, I have identified many anemias caused by proteins involved in protein translation, although these present few neurological symptoms, besides migraine (see Supplementary Table 2).
Table 3

Number of diseases presenting major neurological symptoms

Pathway

Intellectual disability

Seizures

Microcephaly

Generalised hypotonia

Migraine

Specific learning disability

Hypoplasia of the corpus callosum

Hyporeflexia

Spasticity

Energetic metabolism

 Glycolysis (including glucose transporters)

2

2

1

1

0

1

0

2

3

 Translocation of GLUT4 to the plasma membrane

2

7

3

2

0

2

4

1

2

Protein metabolism

 Protein translation

1

0

2

1

9

0

0

0

0

 Chaperonin-mediated protein folding

2

1

1

2

0

0

1

1

0

 Different proteasome pathways

2

3

3

3

0

0

2

0

0

Endocytosis and traffic of neurotransmitter receptors

 Trafficking of AMPA receptors

6

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

 Clathrin-mediated endocytosis

3

3

2

3

0

3

0

1

0

Total

18

17

13

12

9

6

7

6

5

Intellectual disability and seizures are among the most common symptoms caused by metabolism proteins in the PSD

We first looked into the overall number of different phenotypes caused by these 60 diseases. Surprisingly, 836 different phenotypes were identified, indicating the complex nature of the conditions caused by these 53 proteins. This is further illustrated by the fact that most phenotypes are only found in one or two disorders (691/836, ≈ 83% of the total). Among the most frequent symptoms identified by HPO (Table 3), two are neurological: ‘Intellectual Disability’ (in 18 different diseases) and ‘Seizures’ (in 17). Other relevant neurological symptoms identified are ‘Microcephaly’, ‘Specific Learning Disabilities’, ‘Hyporeflexia’ or ‘Spasticity’. Some of these symptoms were much more commonly found in conditions caused by proteins from the same metabolic pathway. The most extreme case is that of ‘Spasticity’, which is only caused by proteins related to energetic metabolism. Another example is found in ‘Specific Learning Disabilities’ that is absent from diseases caused by the protein machinery involved in protein metabolism. Many of these diseases are related to the new categories of inborn errors of metabolism affecting systems involved in intracellular vesiculation, trafficking, processing of complex molecules and quality control processes (such as protein folding and autophagy) (García-Cazorla and Saudubray, this issue).

The elevated frequency of intellectual disability and seizures among disorders caused by proteins related to postsynaptic metabolic pathways is in favour of a postsynaptic role in some of these conditions. These two phenotypes are characteristic of disorders caused by genes coding for proteins with a very prominent role at the PSD. This is the case of ionotropic glutamate receptors and their auxiliary proteins (Soto et al. 2014; Bayés et al. 2014; Volk et al. 2015; Zehavi et al. 2017), SYNGAP1 (Hamdan et al. 2009; Clement et al. 2012), DLG3 (Tarpey et al. 2004), SHANK2 (Berkel et al. 2010; Leblond et al. 2012), SHANK3 (Guilmatre et al. 2014), NEUROLIGIN 2 (Parente et al. 2017) or OPHN1 (Billuart et al. 1998), to mention just a few. These phenotypic correspondences would support the notion that postsynaptic dysfunction might have a role in some neurometabolic disorders. Nevertheless, further research in this field must be done to corroborate this hypothesis.

Conclusions

In the recently developed field of synaptopathies (Brose et al. 2010; Grant 2012), the role of many postsynaptic proteins in mental disorders is already well established (Guilmatre et al. 2009; Hamdan et al. 2011; Kirov et al. 2011). Nevertheless, the vast majority of postsynaptic proteins known to cause brain conditions are not involved in metabolism. In this article, I have explored the possibility of a primary role in disease of postsynaptic proteins involved in metabolic pathways. I have shown that energy production, protein turnover and neurotransmitter receptor traffic are the major metabolic pathways present at the postsynapse and that many proteins from these processes cause inherited disorders encompassing neurological manifestations. Importantly, the most common neurological phenotypes caused by these disorders are intellectual disability and seizures. Although, many other symptoms are present, including movement disorders, as recently reported (Kurian M, this issue). The fact that intellectual disability and seizures are key phenotypes of well-established synaptopathies caused by postsynaptic proteins and of conditions caused by postsynaptic proteins involved in metabolism is suggestive of a role of postsynaptic metabolism in certain neurological conditions. Future research will be required to explore this hypothesis.

Notes

Acknowledgments

AB wishes to thank Dr. Angels García-Cazorla (Hospital Sant Joan de Déu, Barcelona, Spain) for fruitful discussions on the subject of this article.

Funding information

Financial support was from Spanish grants ref. BFU2012-34398, BFU2015-69717-P (partially funded by FEDER funds of the EU), Ramón y Cajal Fellowship, ref. RYC-2011-08391 and from the European FP People: Marie Curie Action: Career Integration Grant, ref. 304111. Support was also obtained from the CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Àlex Bayés declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

10545_2018_240_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (33 kb)
Supplementary Table 1 (XLSX 33 kb)
10545_2018_240_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (19 kb)
Supplementary Table 2 (XLSX 18 kb)

References

  1. Anggono V, Huganir RL (2012) Regulation of AMPA receptor trafficking and synaptic plasticity. Curr Opin Neurobiol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2011.12.006
  2. Ashrafi G, Wu Z, Farrell RJ, Ryan TA (2017) GLUT4 mobilization supports energetic demands of active synapses. Neuron 93:606–615.e3.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Attwell D, Laughlin SB (2001) An energy budget for signaling in the grey matter of the brain. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 21:1133–1145.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00004647-200110000-00001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bayés A, Grant SGN (2009) Neuroproteomics: understanding the molecular organization and complexity of the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci 10:635–646.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2701 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayés A, Van De Lagemaat LN, Collins MO et al (2011) Characterization of the proteome, diseases and evolution of the human postsynaptic density. Nat Neurosci 14:19–21.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2719 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bayés A, Collins MO, Croning MDR et al (2012) Comparative study of human and mouse postsynaptic proteomes finds high compositional conservation and abundance differences for key synaptic proteins. PLoS One 7:e46683.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0046683 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bayés A, Collins MO, Galtrey CM et al (2014) Human post-mortem synapse proteome integrity screening for proteomic studies of postsynaptic complexes. Mol Brain 7:635.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13041-014-0088-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bayés À, Collins MO, Reig-Viader R et al (2017) Evolution of complexity in the zebrafish synapse proteome. Nat Commun 8:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14613 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beaulieu C, Colonnier M (1985) A laminar analysis of the number of round-asymmetrical and flat-symmetrical synapses on spines, dendritic trunks, and cell bodies in area 17 of the cat. J Comp Neurol 231:180–189.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.902310206 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berkel S, Marshall CR, Weiss B et al (2010) Mutations in the SHANK2 synaptic scaffolding gene in autism spectrum disorder and mental retardation. Nat Genet 42:489–491.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.589 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Billuart P, Bienvenu T, Ronce N et al (1998) Oligophrenin-1 encodes a rhoGAP protein involved in X-linked mental retardation. Nature 392:923–926.  https://doi.org/10.1038/31940 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bingol B, Schuman EM (2006) Activity-dependent dynamics and sequestration of proteasomes in dendritic spines. Nature 441:1144–1148.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04769 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boeckers TM (2006) The postsynaptic density. Cell Tissue Res 326:409–422.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00441-006-0274-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brose N, O’Connor V, Skehel P (2010) Synaptopathy: dysfunction of synaptic function? Biochem Soc Trans 38:443–444.  https://doi.org/10.1042/BST0380443 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carlin RK, Grab DJ, Cohen RS, Siekevitz P (1980) Isolation and characterization of postsynaptic densities from various brain regions: enrichment of different types of postsynaptic densities. J Cell Biol 86:831–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clement JP, Aceti M, Creson TK et al (2012) Pathogenic SYNGAP1 mutations impair cognitive development by disrupting maturation of dendritic spine synapses. Cell 151:709–723.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.08.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cortès-Saladelafont E, Tristán-Noguero A, Artuch R et al (2016) Diseases of the synaptic vesicle: a potential new group of neurometabolic disorders affecting neurotransmission. Semin Pediatr Neurol 23:306–320.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spen.2016.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Robertis E, Bennett HS (1954) Submicroscopic vesicular component in the synapse. Fed Proc 13:35–42Google Scholar
  19. Defelipe J, Alonso-Nanclares L, Arellano JI (2002) Microstructure of the neocortex: comparative aspects. J Neurocytol 31:299–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Distler U, Schmeisser MJ, Pelosi A et al (2014) In-depth protein profiling of the postsynaptic density from mouse hippocampus using data-independent acquisition proteomics. Proteomics 14:2607–2613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dosemeci A, Weinberg RJ, Reese TS, Tao-Cheng J-H (2016) The postsynaptic density: there is more than meets the eye. Front Synaptic Neurosci 8:23.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsyn.2016.00023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ehlers MD (2003) Activity level controls postsynaptic composition and signaling via the ubiquitin-proteasome system. Nat Neurosci 6:231–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fabregat A, Jupe S, Matthews L et al (2018) The Reactome Pathway Knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res 46:D649–D655.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx1132 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fernandez E, Collins MO, Uren RT et al (2009) Targeted tandem affinity purification of PSD-95 recovers core postsynaptic complexes and schizophrenia susceptibility proteins. Mol Syst Biol 5:269.  https://doi.org/10.1038/msb.2009.27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ferreira JM, Burnett AL, Rameau GA (2011) Activity-dependent regulation of surface glucose transporter-3. J Neurosci 31:1991–1999.  https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1850-09.2011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Focking M, Dicker P, Lopez LM et al (2016) Proteomic analysis of the postsynaptic density implicates synaptic function and energy pathways in bipolar disorder. Transl Psychiatry 6:e959–e959.  https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2016.224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Grant SG (2012) Synaptopathies: diseases of the synaptome. Curr Opin Neurobiol 22:522–529.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2012.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gray EG (1959) Electron microscopy of synaptic contacts on dendrite spines of the cerebral cortex. Nature 183:1592–1593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Guilmatre A, Dubourg C, Mosca AL et al (2009) Recurrent rearrangements in synaptic and neurodevelopmental genes and shared biologic pathways in schizophrenia, autism, and mental retardation. Arch Gen Psychiatry 66:947–956.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.80 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Guilmatre A, Huguet G, Delorme R, Bourgeron T (2014) The emerging role of SHANK genes in neuropsychiatric disorders. Dev Neurobiol 74:113–122.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dneu.22128 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hamdan FF, Gauthier J, Spiegelman D et al (2009) Mutations in SYNGAP1 in autosomal nonsyndromic mental retardation. N Engl J Med 360:599–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hamdan FF, Gauthier J, Araki Y et al (2011) Excess of de novo deleterious mutations in genes associated with glutamatergic systems in nonsyndromic intellectual disability. Am J Hum Genet 88:306–316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2011.02.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Harris JJ, Jolivet R, Attwell D (2012) Synaptic energy use and supply. Neuron 75:762–777.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.08.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hoffman GF, Blau N (2014) Congenital neurotransmitter disorders: a clinical approach, 1st edn. Nova Science Publishers Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Ikemoto A, Bole DG, Ueda T (2003) Glycolysis and glutamate accumulation into synaptic vesicles. J Biol Chem 278:5929–5940.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)00098-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jang S, Nelson JC, Bend EG et al (2016) Glycolytic enzymes localize to synapses under energy stress to support synaptic function. Neuron 90:278–291.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.03.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jurcovicova J (2014) Glucose transport in brain - effect of inflammation. Endocr Regul 48:35–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kim E, Sheng M (2009) The postsynaptic density. Curr Biol 19:R723–R724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kirov G, Pocklington AJ, Holmans P et al (2011) De novo CNV analysis implicates specific abnormalities of postsynaptic signalling complexes in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. Mol Psychiatry 17:142–153.  https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2011.154 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Köhler S, Vasilevsky NA, Engelstad M et al (2017) The human phenotype ontology in 2017. Nucleic Acids Res 45:D865–D876.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw1039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Leblond CS, Heinrich J, Delorme R et al (2012) Genetic and functional analyses of SHANK2 mutations suggest a multiple hit model of autism spectrum disorders. PLoS Genet 8:e1002521.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002521 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Leino RL, Gerhart DZ, van Bueren AM et al (1997) Ultrastructural localization of GLUT 1 and GLUT 3 glucose transporters in rat brain. J Neurosci Res 49:617–626.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4547(19970901)49:5<617::AID-JNR12>3.0.CO;2-S CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Li Z, Okamoto K-I, Hayashi Y, Sheng M (2004) The importance of dendritic mitochondria in the morphogenesis and plasticity of spines and synapses. Cell 119:873–887.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2004.11.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Marecos C, Ng J, Kurian MA (2014) What is new for monoamine neurotransmitter disorders? J Inherit Metab Dis 37:619–626.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10545-014-9697-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Martin KC, Barad M, Kandel ER (2000) Local protein synthesis and its role in synapse-specific plasticity. Curr Opin Neurobiol 10:587–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McKusick VA (2007) Mendelian inheritance in man and its online version, OMIM. Am J Hum Genet 80:588–604.  https://doi.org/10.1086/514346 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mi H, Poudel S, Muruganujan A et al (2016) PANTHER version 10: expanded protein families and functions, and analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res 44:D336–D342.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv1194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ng J, Papandreou A, Heales SJ, Kurian MA (2015) Monoamine neurotransmitter disorders-clinical advances and future perspectives. Nat Rev Neurol 11:567–584.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2015.172 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ostroff LE, Fiala JC, Allwardt B, Harris KM (2002) Polyribosomes redistribute from dendritic shafts into spines with enlarged synapses during LTP in developing rat hippocampal slices. Neuron 35:535–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Palade GE, Palay SL (1954) Electron microscope observations of interneuronal and neuromuscular synapses. Anat Rec 118:335–336Google Scholar
  51. Parente DJ, Garriga C, Baskin B et al (2017) Neuroligin 2 nonsense variant associated with anxiety, autism, intellectual disability, hyperphagia, and obesity. Am J Med Genet A 173:213–216.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.37977 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pearl PL, Taylor JL, Trzcinski S, Sokohl A (2007) The pediatric neurotransmitter disorders. J Child Neurol 22:606–616.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073807302619 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pearl PL, Gibson KM, Quezado Z et al (2009) Decreased GABA-A binding on FMZ-PET in succinic semialdehyde dehydrogenase deficiency. Neurology 73:423–429.  https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181b163a5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Racz B, Blanpied TA, Ehlers MD, Weinberg RJ (2004) Lateral organization of endocytic machinery in dendritic spines. Nat Neurosci 7:917–918.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rangaraju V, Calloway N, Ryan TA (2014) Activity-driven local ATP synthesis is required for synaptic function. Cell 156:825–835.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.12.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reig-Viader R, Sindreu C, Bayés A (2018) Synaptic proteomics as a means to identify the molecular basis of mental illness: are we getting there? Prog Neuro-Psychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 84:353–361.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2017.09.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reis J, Cohen LG, Pearl PL et al (2012) GABAB-ergic motor cortex dysfunction in SSADH deficiency. Neurology 79:47–54.  https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31825dcf71 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Roy M, Sorokina O, Skene N et al (2018) Proteomic analysis of postsynaptic proteins in regions of the human neocortex. Nat Neurosci 21:130–138.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-017-0025-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Salomons GS, van Dooren SJM, Verhoeven NM et al (2003) X-linked creatine transporter defect: an overview. J Inherit Metab Dis 26:309–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sheng M, Kim E (2011) The postsynaptic organization of synapses. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 3:a005678–a005678.  https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a005678 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shepherd JD, Huganir RL (2007) The cell biology of synaptic plasticity: AMPA receptor trafficking. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 23:613–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Simpson IA, Carruthers A, Vannucci SJ (2007) Supply and demand in cerebral energy metabolism: the role of nutrient transporters. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 27:1766–1791.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jcbfm.9600521 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Soto D, Altafaj X, Sindreu C, Bayés A (2014) Glutamate receptor mutations in psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. Commun Integr Biol 7:e27887.  https://doi.org/10.4161/cib.27887 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Spacek J (1985) Three-dimensional analysis of dendritic spines. II. Spine apparatus and other cytoplasmic components. Anat Embryol 171:235–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Steward O, Levy WB (1982) Preferential localization of polyribosomes under the base of dendritic spines in granule cells of the dentate gyrus. J Neurosci 2:284–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tarpey P, Parnau J, Blow M et al (2004) Mutations in the DLG3 gene cause nonsyndromic X-linked mental retardation. Am J Hum Genet 75:318–324.  https://doi.org/10.1086/422703 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Volk L, Chiu S-L, Sharma K, Huganir RL (2015) Glutamate synapses in human cognitive disorders. Annu Rev Neurosci.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-071714-033821
  68. von Bohlen Und Halbach O (2009) Structure and function of dendritic spines within the hippocampus. Ann Anat 191:518–531.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2009.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wu K, Aoki C, Elste A et al (1997) The synthesis of ATP by glycolytic enzymes in the postsynaptic density and the effect of endogenously generated nitric oxide. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:13273–13278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yuste R (2015) The discovery of dendritic spines by Cajal. Front Neuroanat 9:18.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2015.00018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zehavi Y, Mandel H, Zehavi A et al (2017) De novo GRIN1 mutations: an emerging cause of severe early infantile encephalopathy. Eur J Med Genet 60:317–320.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmg.2017.04.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Molecular Physiology of the Synapse LaboratoryBiomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Universitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBellaterraSpain

Personalised recommendations