Abstract

The central terminals of primary afferent fibers experience depolarization upon activation of GABAA receptors (GABAAR) because their intracellular chloride concentration is maintained above electrochemical equilibrium. Primary afferent depolarization (PAD) normally mediates inhibition via sodium channel inactivation and shunting but can evoke spikes under certain conditions. Antidromic (centrifugal) conduction of these spikes may contribute to neurogenic inflammation while orthodromic (centripetal) conduction could contribute to pain in the case of nociceptive fibers. PAD-induced spiking is assumed to override presynaptic inhibition. Using computer simulations and dynamic clamp experiments, we sought to identify which biophysical changes are required to enable PAD-induced spiking and whether those changes necessarily compromise PAD-mediated inhibition. According to computational modeling, a depolarizing shift in GABA reversal potential (EGABA) and increased intrinsic excitability (manifest as altered spike initiation properties) were necessary for PAD-induced spiking, whereas increased GABAAR conductance density (ḡGABA) had mixed effects. We tested our predictions experimentally by using dynamic clamp to insert virtual GABAAR conductances with different EGABA and kinetics into acutely dissociated dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neuron somata. Comparable experiments in central axon terminals are prohibitively difficult but the biophysical requirements for PAD-induced spiking are arguably similar in soma and axon. Neurons from naïve (i.e. uninjured) rats were compared before and after pharmacological manipulation of intrinsic excitability, and against neurons from nerve-injured rats. Experimental data confirmed that, in most neurons, both predicted changes were necessary to yield PAD-induced spiking. Importantly, such changes did not prevent PAD from inhibiting other spiking or from blocking spike propagation. In fact, since the high value of ḡGABA required for PAD-induced spiking still mediates strong inhibition, we conclude that PAD-induced spiking does not represent failure of presynaptic inhibition. Instead, diminished PAD caused by reduction of ḡGABA poses a greater risk to presynaptic inhibition and the sensory processing that relies upon it.

Highlights

  • Synaptic inhibition regulates transmission of sensory signals through the spinal cord

  • Postsynaptic GABAA receptors (GABAAR) mediate inhibition by causing hyperpolarization or by preventing the depolarization caused by concurrent excitatory input

  • Presynaptic GABAAR work differently, in the spinal cord at least. Because of their higher-than-equilibrium intracellular chloride concentration, the central terminals of primary afferent fibers are depolarized by activation of GABAAR

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Synaptic inhibition regulates transmission of sensory signals through the spinal cord. Decreased transmitter release, reduced GABAA/glycine receptor function, and altered chloride regulation are all potential disinhibitory mechanisms, but pre- and postsynaptic inhibition are not susceptible to certain pathological changes; for instance, the potassium-chloride co-transporter KCC2 is not expressed in primary afferent neurons, meaning disinhibitory effects of KCC2 downregulation [10] are attributable entirely to reduced postsynaptic inhibition, in cells that express KCC2. Selective disruption of presynaptic inhibition can cause mechanical and thermal hypersensitivity [13] and presynaptic expression of the α2 GABA receptor subunit is necessary for the antihyperalgesic effect of diazepam [14]. These observations affirm that presynaptic GABAARmediated inhibition plays a key role in nociception

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call