Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Center for Glial-Neuronal Interactions, University of California-Riverside, Riverside, California 92521, and
Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7365
J Neurosci. 2018 Jan 3;38(1):3-13. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0016-17.2017.
A major controversy persists within the field of glial biology concerning whether or not, under physiological conditions, neuronal activity leads to Ca-dependent release of neurotransmitters from astrocytes, a phenomenon known as gliotransmission. Our perspective is that, while we and others can apply techniques to cause gliotransmission, there is considerable evidence gathered using astrocyte-specific and more physiological approaches which suggests that gliotransmission is a pharmacological phenomenon rather than a physiological process. Approaches providing evidence against gliotransmission include stimulation of Gq-GPCRs expressed only in astrocytes, as well as removal of the primary proposed source of astrocyte Ca responsible for gliotransmission. These approaches contrast with those supportive of gliotransmission, which include mechanical stimulation, strong astrocytic depolarization using whole-cell patch-clamp or optogenetics, uncaging Ca or IP3, chelating Ca using BAPTA, and nonspecific bath application of agonists to receptors expressed by a multitude of cell types. These techniques are not subtle and therefore are not supportive of recent suggestions that gliotransmission requires very specific and delicate temporal and spatial requirements. Other evidence, including lack of propagating Ca waves between astrocytes in healthy tissue, lack of expression of vesicular release machinery, and the demise of the d-serine gliotransmission hypothesis, provides additional evidence against gliotransmission. Overall, the data suggest that Ca-dependent release of neurotransmitters is the province of neurons, not astrocytes, in the intact brain under physiological conditions..
胶质生物学领域存在一个主要争议,即在生理条件下,神经元活动是否会导致神经递质从星形胶质细胞中依赖 Ca 的释放,这种现象称为胶质传递。我们的观点是,虽然我们和其他人可以应用技术来引起胶质传递,但使用星形胶质细胞特异性和更生理的方法收集到的大量证据表明,胶质传递是一种药理学现象,而不是生理过程。反对胶质传递的方法包括刺激仅在星形胶质细胞中表达的 Gq-GPCR,以及去除负责胶质传递的星形胶质细胞 Ca 的主要拟议来源。这些方法与支持胶质传递的方法形成对比,后者包括机械刺激、使用全细胞膜片钳或光遗传学使星形胶质细胞强烈去极化、通过 uncaging Ca 或 IP3 释放 Ca、使用 BAPTA 螯合 Ca 以及非特异性浴应用多种细胞类型表达的受体激动剂。这些技术不微妙,因此不支持最近的建议,即胶质传递需要非常特定和微妙的时间和空间要求。其他证据,包括健康组织中星形胶质细胞之间没有传播 Ca 波、缺乏囊泡释放机制以及 D-丝氨酸胶质传递假说的消亡,进一步证明了胶质传递的不存在。总的来说,这些数据表明,在生理条件下,完整大脑中依赖 Ca 的神经递质释放是神经元的领域,而不是星形胶质细胞。