Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Structural Plasticity of Dendritic Spines

Dendritic spines are small mushroom-like protrusions arising from neurons where most excitatory synapses reside. Their peculiar shape suggests that spines can serve as an autonomous postsynaptic compartment that isolates chemical and electrical signaling. How neuronal activity modifies the morphology of the spine and how these modifications affect synaptic transmission and plasticity are intriguing issues. Indeed, the induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) or depression (LTD) is associated with the enlargement or shrinkage of the spine, respectively. This structural plasticity is mainly controlled by actin filaments, the principal cytoskeletal component of the spine. Here we review the pioneering microscopic studies examining the structural plasticity of spines and propose how changes in actin treadmilling might regulate spine morphology.

CONEUR-967; NO. OF PAGES 6 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Structural plasticity of dendritic spines Miquel Bosch1 and Yasunori Hayashi2 Dendritic spines are small mushroom-like protrusions arising from neurons where most excitatory synapses reside. Their peculiar shape suggests that spines can serve as an autonomous postsynaptic compartment that isolates chemical and electrical signaling. How neuronal activity modifies the morphology of the spine and how these modifications affect synaptic transmission and plasticity are intriguing issues. Indeed, the induction of long-term potentiation (LTP) or depression (LTD) is associated with the enlargement or shrinkage of the spine, respectively. This structural plasticity is mainly controlled by actin filaments, the principal cytoskeletal component of the spine. Here we review the pioneering microscopic studies examining the structural plasticity of spines and propose how changes in actin treadmilling might regulate spine morphology. Addresses 1 The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 2 Brain Science Institute, RIKEN, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan transduction molecules, ion channels, and cytoskeletal components [7]. In addition to the PSD, the spine membrane may contain specialized microdomains for endocytosis or exocytosis [8,9]. The cytoskeleton in spines is mainly formed by actin filaments (F-actin), which serve both as a structural framework and as the principal regulator of protein and vesicular trafficking [10–12]. Mature spines may also contain intracellular membranous structures (e.g. spine apparatus or amorphous vesicular clumps), protein synthesis machinery such as polyribosomes, and mitochondria [13–17]. The spine head is connected to the dendritic shaft via a thin neck (width of 0.2 mm) that is thought to work as a diffusion barrier for molecules and ions. Moreover, the spine and the presynaptic terminus are surrounded by perisynaptic glial processes, thereby forming a tripartite synapse [18,19]. These morphological characteristics have led researchers to consider that the dendritic spine may function as a microcompartment that confines postsynaptic signaling both chemically and electrically [1,2,20,21]. Corresponding author: Hayashi, Yasunori (yhayashi@brain.riken.jp) Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 This review comes from a themed issue on Synaptic Structure and Function Edited by Morgan Sheng and Antoine Triller 0959-4388/$ – see front matter # 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. DOI 10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 Morphology of the dendritic spine In the vertebrate central nervous system, excitatory synapses are usually formed on small, mushroom-like protrusions on dendrites called dendritic spines [1,2]. Typically, one single glutamatergic synapse is formed at the head of a spine, although some spines may receive multiple presynaptic termini or non-excitatory inputs [1,3]. Spines are composed of highly specialized subdomains exerting different functions in synaptic transmission and plasticity. Beneath the synapse, one can find an electron-dense disc-like structure, called the postsynaptic density (PSD). The PSD is composed of multiple proteins that bind with each other through specific domain–domain interactions, forming a meshlike structure organized in consecutive layers [4–7]. These proteins include neurotransmitter receptors, scaffolding proteins that stabilize those receptors, signal www.sciencedirect.com Spines exhibit a wide range of size and shapes, even within a single neuron. During cortical development, spines are rather thin and elongated and gradually gain a typical mushroom-like structure with a prominent head and a thin neck as the tissue matures [22–24]. There is a positive correlation between the spine head volume, the PSD area, the presynaptic active zone area, the number of AMPA-type glutamate receptors, and the synaptic strength [25–27,28]. These correlations suggest that spine structure is tightly coupled to synaptic function. Furthermore, time-lapse studies have shown that spines are extremely plastic and motile. In sensory cortex, this motility is regulated by sensory experience and significantly decreases with age [22,29,30]. However, we still do not fully understand the intrinsic relationship between structural and functional plasticities of the spine. Therefore, it is of great interest to know how spine head and neck morphologies are regulated by neuronal activity to ultimately comprehend why spines have such unique shape and how its modifications affect synaptic functions. Electron microscopic studies on the activitydependent structural plasticity of dendritic spines The very first evidence supporting the structural modification of dendritic spines associated with synaptic activity came from a series of electron microscopic (EM) studies by Eva Fifková and co-workers in 1970s to 1980s. They induced long-term potentiation (LTP) at synapses between hippocampal perforant path and dentate granule cells in vivo, using the same preparation Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 Please cite this article in press as: Bosch M, Hayashi Y. Structural plasticity of dendritic spines, Curr Opin Neurobiol (2011), doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 CONEUR-967; NO. OF PAGES 6 2 Synaptic Structure and Function wherein Bliss and Lømo [31] reported the first synaptic plasticity in the mammalian central nervous system. Only two years after the study by Bliss and Lømo, Fifková and co-workers found that dendritic spines on stimulated pathway were larger than those in unstimulated pathway or in control animals [32]. This enlargement was found as early as 2 min after tetanic stimulation and lasted up to 23 h [33]. At the same time, they found wider and shorter spine necks after LTP induction [34]. If we approximate the spine neck to a cylinder, we calculate that these changes reduce the spine electrical resistance by 74% at 4 min and by 54% at 60 min. These changes may lead to more efficient transmission of electrical current generated at the dendritic spine head. Using a similar approach, Desmond and Levy observed an increase in the proportion of concave-shaped spines with a concomitant decrease in those with simple and ellipsoid shape [35]. Along with it, total PSD surface area associated with concave spines increased significantly [36]. Harris and co-workers examined CA1 pyramidal cells in hippocampal slices, a conventional preparation for studying LTP, with electron microscopy and found that the percentage of spines containing polyribosomes increased 2 h after a tetanic stimulation [15]. Those spines contained significantly wider PSD as well. Other features commonly found after LTP induction is an increase in the number of spines with perforated PSD [23,37,38], the number of bifurcated spines ([39], but also see [40]) and the formation of spinules from the spine head [41,42]. These studies strongly support the view that the structure and contents of a dendritic spine can undergo long-term modifications during synaptic plasticity. Light microscopic studies on the activitydependent structural plasticity of dendritic spines In these EM studies, because of an obvious lack of capability of time-lapse imaging, it was not possible to demonstrate whether existing spines became enlarged or whether spines with larger size were generated de novo by LTP induction. It was even not possible to know whether a given synapse under observation was actually potentiated or not. Those results relied on statistical differences between different populations of spines and, therefore, had a certain limitation in interpretation as to whether they were truly observing phenomena directly associated with LTP or processes occurring in parallel and not directly involved in the induction or maintenance of LTP itself. Hosokawa et al. were the first to attempt time-lapse imaging of the same set of dendritic spines in hippocampal slices before and after LTP induction [43]. They used a confocal microscope to observe DiI-labeled neurons and found an increase in length in a subpopulation of small spines 3 h after the induction of chemical LTP. Maletic-Savatic et al. employed two-photon microscopy in GFP-transfected neurons and induced LTP by local stimulation with a glass electrode [44]. They observed the generation of new filopodia-like protrusions and, at the same time, the loss of existing spines. Engert and Bonhoeffer [45] also carried out a similar experiment by locally perfusing a dendritic segment with Ca2+-containing extracellular fluid while suppressing synaptic transmission in the rest of the dendrite by Cd2+-containing solution. Electrical stimulation resulted in the generation of new spines only in the segment where Ca2+ was available. However, the generation of new spines did not synchronously occur with the increase in the synaptic transmission. While the increase in excitatory postsynaptic current (EPSC) amplitude was observed within a few minutes after LTP induction, the generation of new spines occurred much later. Therefore, it still remained an unanswered question whether the enlarged spines indeed underwent LTP or not. To elucidate this issue, Matsuzaki et al. [28,46] employed a two-photon-induced glutamate uncaging technique, which allows the controlled release of glutamate in a very small volume compared with other approaches (such as local glutamate application through pipette or conventional UV-mediated uncaging method). Combined with electrophysiological recordings, they showed that repeated uncaging of glutamate in Mg2+-free solution induced both an expansion of the dendritic spine as well as an increase in the synaptic electrical response. Okamoto et al. [47] found a similar expansion of the dendritic spine that synchronized with the local electrical stimulation of presynaptic fibers (Figure 1a). The same result was observed when glutamate uncaging was paired with channelrhodopsin-induced depolarization of the postsynaptic neuron [48]. In addition to these studies demonstrating structural changes of existing spines, a recent study demonstrated a de novo formation of new spines after local glutamate uncaging in the dendrite [49]. Whether the diameter and length of the spine neck change or not has not been confirmed using live imaging techniques available so far. The recent development of superresolution imaging methods will be key to answering this question [50,51,52,53,54]. Conversely, the induction of long-term depression (LTD) by either electrical or chemical stimulation induces shrinkage [47,55,56,57] or loss of dendritic spines [47,58]. Spine shrinkage is persistent but reversible, as it can be reverted by a potentiation stimulus [55]. These studies on LTD and other recent studies on LTP [59,60] show that structural plasticity can be dissociated from functional plasticity. Although they share the same initial triggering mechanisms, they seem to be regulated by parallel but distinct downstream intracellular signaling pathways. Thus, the role of morphological changes of spines in synaptic transmission and plasticity still remains an open question. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 Please cite this article in press as: Bosch M, Hayashi Y. Structural plasticity of dendritic spines, Curr Opin Neurobiol (2011), doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 www.sciencedirect.com CONEUR-967; NO. OF PAGES 6 Structural plasticity of dendritic spines Bosch and Hayashi 3 Figure 1 (a) Tetanus CFP -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 FRET Higher FRET 0.5 µm (b) 0.2 µm Current Opinion in Neurobiology Actin filaments in the dendritic spine. (a) Expansion of the dendritic spine and rapid polymerization of actin by local tetanic stimulation. Actin polymerization was visualized by FRET-based imaging method, which detects the proximity of actin molecules. Obtained from [47]. (b) An electron micrographic image of a dendritic spine showing S1-fragment labeled F-actin. Contrast was adjusted from the original, and coloring (red, spine head; yellow, dendritic shaft) was added by the authors of this review. Arrowheads point to the spine neck. Obtained from [12]. F-actin regulation as a mechanism underlying structural plasticity What molecular mechanisms are responsible for the structural plasticity of dendritic spines? By decorating F-actin with myosin subfragment 1 (S-1 fragment), Fifková et al. demonstrated that actin filaments are associated with the plasma membrane and the PSD at their barbed ends and form a lattice structure within the spine head matrix [12] (Figure 1b). By contrast, the actin filaments are organized in long strands in the spine neck and dendritic shaft. This finding was also confirmed by a recent EM study [61]. The authors predicted that, given the dynamic properties of actin, actin filaments play a crucial role in synaptic plasticity, by changing the shape of the presynaptic and postsynaptic side and, in neuronal circuits, by mediating the retraction and sprouting of synapses [12]. Consistent with the important role of F-actin regulation in synaptic plasticity, the pharmacological manipulation of actin polymerization and depolymerization effectively blocks LTP [62,63] and, at the same time, suppresses the structural enlargement of dendritic spines [46]. The rapid polymerization of actin in spines during LTP was demonstrated by a FRET-based method that detected actin-actin interactions in real time [47] (Figure 1a). Using www.sciencedirect.com the same system, it was also demonstrated that LTD is accompanied by depolymerization of F-actin [47]. Actin undergoes a rapid turnover in the spine, replacing almost the entire molecular population every 2–3 min [64,65]. Recent studies have revealed the fine details of actin dynamics within dendritic spine subdomains by using photoactivatable and photoswitchable fluorescent protein-tagged actin [65,66]. They found that actin undergoes a constant inward flow from the periphery to the center of the spine on the order of minutes. Because the speed of diffusion of monomeric actin (globular or Gactin) is expected to be much faster (on the order of seconds), the observed fluorescence movement reflects the treadmilling of F-actin, i.e., the movement of the monomer within the filament while it polymerizes at one side (the barbed end, mainly located at the periphery) and depolymerizes at the other one (the pointed end, located at the spine core; Figure 2a). This is consistent with the polarity of actin filaments revealed by electron microscopic observation [12]. Importantly, stimulation of synaptic glutamate receptor slows down F-actin turnover/treadmilling [64,65]. Furthermore, Honkura et al. found that LTP induction Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 Please cite this article in press as: Bosch M, Hayashi Y. Structural plasticity of dendritic spines, Curr Opin Neurobiol (2011), doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 CONEUR-967; NO. OF PAGES 6 4 Synaptic Structure and Function Figure 2 (a) (b) G-actin barbed end F-actin (c) G-actin polymerization F-actin spine expansion polymerization polymerization F-actin pointed end depolymerization depolymerization F-actin stability depolymerization F-actin stability G-actin Current Opinion in Neurobiology Proposed mechanisms for spine expansion. (a) In a naive spine, there is a constant treadmilling of actin from the periphery to the center of the dendritic spine, maintained by an equilibrated rate of F-actin polymerization/depolymerization. (b) LTP induction stabilizes the actin filaments and slows down the depolymerization at the pointed end of F-actin located at the core of dendritic spine. (c) Polymerization continues in the periphery of dendritic spine, thereby generating the driving force that expands the spine head. leads to a formation of a new stable population of actin at the core of the spine head [65]. This could be explained by a reduced depolymerization rate from the pointed end of the actin filament at the core of the spine. Polymerization would continue at the barbed end in the spine periphery, thereby generating the force that enlarges the dendritic spine. This effect would also be responsible for the overall shift in G-actin/F-actin equilibrium towards polymerization. We propose that this is the mechanism of expansion of the dendritic spine during LTP (Figure 2b and c). It is therefore crucial to elucidate the signaling pathways that regulate F-actin treadmilling during LTP to understand synaptic plasticity [67,68]. The blockade of NMDA-type glutamate receptor (NMDAR) completely inhibits structural LTP [46,47]. Inhibition of Ca2+/ calmodulin-dependent protein kinases (CaMK) partially blocks the spine enlargement [46,69]. One of the major members of the CaMK family present in the PSD, CaMKIIb, bundles F-actin filaments independently of its kinase activity. Interestingly, the activation of CaMKIIb by Ca2+/CaM inhibits this F-actin bundling capacity [70]. Such ability may determine the time window wherein F-actin can be reorganized [71]. A recent imaging study detected a persistent activation of the Rho family of small G-proteins in the dendritic spine after LTP induction [72]. The pharmacological blockade of downstream signaling pathway of these proteins, including p21-activated kinase (PAK) and Rho-associated, coiled-coil containing protein kinase (ROCK), effectively blocked spine enlargement [72]. These pathways regulate the activity of several actinbinding proteins [68], such as profilin and cofilin, which might ultimately be responsible for altering the rate of actin polymerization/depolymerization and treadmilling and, thus, for controlling spine morphology. Concluding remarks The development of new imaging and optical manipulation techniques allows us to visualize the behavior of single dendritic spines during synaptic plasticity in great temporal and spatial detail. This technology revealed a novel aspect of hippocampal LTP, namely the structural modification of the dendritic spine. There is a tight correlation between the physiology of synaptic transmission and the shape of the dendritic spine, although both phenomena could play distinct and complementary functions in neuronal plasticity. The current development of more sophisticated imaging modalities combined with molecular and electrophysiological methods will further elucidate the fundamental role that the morphology of the dendritic spine may play in the processes of learning and memory. Acknowledgements The authors dedicate this review to Eva Fifková (May 21, 1932–February 1, 2010). We thank Lily Yu for editing. This work was supported by RIKEN, NIH grant R01DA17310, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) and Grantin-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Area ‘Foundation of Synapse and Neurocircuit Pathology’ from the MEXT, Japan (Y.H.). M.B. is a recipient of a ‘Beatriu de Pinós’ fellowship from the ‘Generalitat de Catalunya’. References and recommended reading Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:  of special interest  of outstanding interest 1. Yuste R: Dendritic Spines. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2010. 2. Hayashi Y, Majewska AK: Dendritic spine geometry: functional implication and regulation. Neuron 2005, 46:529-532. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 Please cite this article in press as: Bosch M, Hayashi Y. Structural plasticity of dendritic spines, Curr Opin Neurobiol (2011), doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 www.sciencedirect.com CONEUR-967; NO. OF PAGES 6 Structural plasticity of dendritic spines Bosch and Hayashi 5 3. Knott GW, Quairiaux C, Genoud C, Welker E: Formation of dendritic spines with GABAergic synapses induced by whisker stimulation in adult mice. Neuron 2002, 34:265-273. 4. Hayashi MK, Tang C, Verpelli C, Narayanan R, Stearns MH, Xu RM, Li H, Sala C, Hayashi Y: The postsynaptic density proteins Homer and Shank form a polymeric network structure. Cell 2009, 137:159-171. 5. Petersen JD, Chen X, Vinade L, Dosemeci A, Lisman JE, Reese TS: Distribution of postsynaptic density (PSD)-95 and Ca2+/ calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II at the PSD. J Neurosci 2003, 23:11270-11278. 6. Valtschanoff JG, Weinberg RJ: Laminar organization of the NMDA receptor complex within the postsynaptic density. J Neurosci 2001, 21:1211-1217. 7. Sheng M, Hoogenraad CC: The postsynaptic architecture of excitatory synapses: a more quantitative view. Annu Rev Biochem 2007, 76:823-847. 8. Blanpied TA, Scott DB, Ehlers MD: Dynamics and regulation of clathrin coats at specialized endocytic zones of dendrites and spines. Neuron 2002, 36:435-449. 9. Newpher TM, Ehlers MD: Spine microdomains for postsynaptic signaling and plasticity. Trends Cell Biol 2009, 19:218-227. 10. Hotulainen P, Hoogenraad CC: Actin in dendritic spines: connecting dynamics to function. J Cell Biol 2010, 189:619-629. 11. Matus A: Actin-based plasticity in dendritic spines. Science 2000, 290:754-758. 12. Fifková E: Actin in the nervous system. Brain Res 1985, 356:187-215. 13. Spacek J, Harris KM: Three-dimensional organization of smooth endoplasmic reticulum in hippocampal CA1 dendrites and dendritic spines of the immature and mature rat. J Neurosci 1997, 17:190-203. 14. Lu J, Helton TD, Blanpied TA, Racz B, Newpher TM, Weinberg RJ, Ehlers MD: Postsynaptic positioning of endocytic zones and AMPA receptor cycling by physical coupling of dynamin-3 to Homer. Neuron 2007, 55:874-889. 15. Ostroff LE, Fiala JC, Allwardt B, Harris KM: Polyribosomes redistribute from dendritic shafts into spines with enlarged synapses during LTP in developing rat hippocampal slices. Neuron 2002, 35:535-545. 16. Segal M, Vlachos A, Korkotian E: The spine apparatus, synaptopodin, and dendritic spine plasticity. Neuroscientist 2010, 16:125-131. 17. Li Z, Okamoto K, Hayashi Y, Sheng M: The importance of dendritic mitochondria in the morphogenesis and plasticity of spines and synapses. Cell 2004, 119:873-887. 18. Araque A, Parpura V, Sanzgiri RP, Haydon PG: Tripartite synapses: glia, the unacknowledged partner. Trends Neurosci 1999, 22:208-215. 19. Witcher MR, Kirov SA, Harris KM: Plasticity of perisynaptic astroglia during synaptogenesis in the mature rat hippocampus. Glia 2007, 55:13-23. 20. Noguchi J, Matsuzaki M, Ellis-Davies GC, Kasai H: Spine-neck geometry determines NMDA receptor-dependent Ca2+ signaling in dendrites. Neuron 2005, 46:609-622. 21. Bloodgood BL, Sabatini BL: Neuronal activity regulates diffusion across the neck of dendritic spines. Science 2005, 310:866-869. 22. Oray S, Majewska A, Sur M: Effects of synaptic activity on dendritic spine motility of developing cortical layer v pyramidal neurons. Cereb Cortex 2006, 16:730-741. 23. Harris KM, Jensen FE, Tsao B: Three-dimensional structure of dendritic spines and synapses in rat hippocampus (CA1) at postnatal day 15 and adult ages: implications for the maturation of synaptic physiology and long-term potentiation. J Neurosci 1992, 12:2685-2705. www.sciencedirect.com 24. Ziv NE, Smith SJ: Evidence for a role of dendritic filopodia in synaptogenesis and spine formation. Neuron 1996, 17:91-102. 25. Harris KM, Stevens JK: Dendritic spines of CA1 pyramidal cells in the rat hippocampus: serial electron microscopy with reference to their biophysical characteristics. J Neurosci 1989, 9:2982-2997. 26. Takumi Y, Ramirez-Leon V, Laake P, Rinvik E, Ottersen OP: Different modes of expression of AMPA and NMDA receptors in hippocampal synapses. Nat Neurosci 1999, 2:618-624. 27. Petralia RS, Esteban JA, Wang YX, Partridge JG, Zhao HM, Wenthold RJ, Malinow R: Selective acquisition of AMPA receptors over postnatal development suggests a molecular basis for silent synapses. Nat Neurosci 1999, 2:31-36. 28. Matsuzaki M, Ellis-Davies GC, Nemoto T, Miyashita Y, Iino M,  Kasai H: Dendritic spine geometry is critical for AMPA receptor expression in hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons. Nat Neurosci 2001, 4:1086-1092. This paper is the first one to measure single spine electrical response by glutamate uncaging. 29. Majewska A, Sur M: Motility of dendritic spines in visual cortex in vivo: changes during the critical period and effects of visual deprivation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:16024-16029. 30. Lendvai B, Stern EA, Chen B, Svoboda K: Experience-dependent plasticity of dendritic spines in the developing rat barrel cortex in vivo. Nature 2000, 404:876-881. 31. Bliss TV, Lømo T: Long-lasting potentiation of synaptic transmission in the dentate area of the anaesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path. J Physiol (Lond) 1973, 232:331-356. 32. Van Harreveld A, Fifková E: Swelling of dendritic spines in the  fascia dentata after stimulation of the perforant fibers as a mechanism of post-tetanic potentiation. Exp Neurol 1975, 49:736-749. See annotation to [34]. 33. Fifková E, Van Harreveld A: Long-lasting morphological  changes in dendritic spines of dentate granular cells following stimulation of the entorhinal area. J Neurocytol 1977, 6:211-230. See annotation to [34]. 34. Fifková E, Anderson CL: Stimulation-induced changes in dimensions of stalks of dendritic spines in the dentate  molecular layer. Exp Neurol 1981, 74:621-627. These three reports are the very first ones to investigate the morphological changes of dendritic spines upon the induction of LTP. 35. Desmond NL, Levy WB: Changes in the numerical density of synaptic contacts with long-term potentiation in the hippocampal dentate gyrus. J Comp Neurol 1986, 253:466-475. 36. Desmond NL, Levy WB: Changes in the postsynaptic density with long-term potentiation in the dentate gyrus. J Comp Neurol 1986, 253:476-482. 37. Calverley RK, Jones DG: Contributions of dendritic spines and perforated synapses to synaptic plasticity. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1990, 15:215-249. 38. Popov VI, Davies HA, Rogachevsky VV, Patrushev IV, Errington ML, Gabbott PL, Bliss TV, Stewart MG: Remodelling of synaptic morphology but unchanged synaptic density during late phase long-term potentiation (LTP): a serial section electron micrograph study in the dentate gyrus in the anaesthetised rat. Neuroscience 2004, 128:251-262. 39. Toni N, Buchs PA, Nikonenko I, Bron CR, Muller D: LTP promotes formation of multiple spine synapses between a single axon terminal and a dendrite. Nature 1999, 402:421-425. 40. Fiala JC, Allwardt B, Harris KM: Dendritic spines do not split during hippocampal LTP or maturation. Nat Neurosci 2002, 5:297-298. 41. Richards DA, Mateos JM, Hugel S, de Paola V, Caroni P, Gähwiler BH, McKinney RA: Glutamate induces the rapid formation of spine head protrusions in hippocampal slice cultures. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102:6166-6171. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 Please cite this article in press as: Bosch M, Hayashi Y. Structural plasticity of dendritic spines, Curr Opin Neurobiol (2011), doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 CONEUR-967; NO. OF PAGES 6 6 Synaptic Structure and Function 42. Tao-Cheng JH, Dosemeci A, Gallant PE, Miller S, Galbraith JA, Winters CA, Azzam R, Reese TS: Rapid turnover of spinules at synaptic terminals. Neuroscience 2009, 160:42-50. 57. Wang XB, Yang Y, Zhou Q: Independent expression of synaptic and morphological plasticity associated with long-term depression. J Neurosci 2007, 27:12419-12429. 43. Hosokawa T, Rusakov DA, Bliss TV, Fine A: Repeated confocal imaging of individual dendritic spines in the living hippocampal slice: evidence for changes in length and orientation associated with chemically induced LTP. J Neurosci 1995, 15:5560-5573. 58. Nägerl UV, Eberhorn N, Cambridge SB, Bonhoeffer T:  Bidirectional activity-dependent morphological plasticity in hippocampal neurons. Neuron 2004, 44:759-767. [47,55,58] reported the shrinkage and elimination of dendritic spines upon LTD induction. 44. Maletic-Savatic M, Malinow R, Svoboda K: Rapid dendritic  morphogenesis in CA1 hippocampal dendrites induced by synaptic activity. Science 1999, 283:1923-1927. See annotation to [45]. 59. Gu J, Lee CW, Fan Y, Komlos D, Tang X, Sun C, Yu K, Hartzell HC, Chen G, Bamburg JR et al.: ADF/cofilin-mediated actin dynamics regulate AMPA receptor trafficking during synaptic plasticity. Nat Neurosci 2010, 13:1208-1215. 45. Engert F, Bonhoeffer T: Dendritic spine changes associated with hippocampal long-term synaptic plasticity. Nature 1999,  399:66-70. These two are the first papers to report the formation of new spines upon LTP induction. 60. Yang Y, Wang XB, Frerking M, Zhou Q: Spine expansion and stabilization associated with long-term potentiation. J Neurosci 2008, 28:5740-5751. 46. Matsuzaki M, Honkura N, Ellis-Davies GC, Kasai H: Structural  basis of long-term potentiation in single dendritic spines. Nature 2004, 429:761-766. See annotation to [47]. 47. Okamoto K, Nagai T, Miyawaki A, Hayashi Y: Rapid and persistent modulation of actin dynamics regulates  postsynaptic reorganization underlying bidirectional plasticity. Nat Neurosci 2004, 7:1104-1112. These two reports found convincing evidence that the individual spines are enlarged by LTP-inducing stimulation. [46] showed the correlation between functional and structural LTP at single spine and [47] showed that actin is dynamically modulated during LTP/LTD. 48. Zhang YP, Holbro N, Oertner TG: Optical induction of plasticity at single synapses reveals input-specific accumulation of aCaMKII. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:12039-12044. 49. Kwon HB, Sabatini BL: Glutamate induces de novo growth of functional spines in developing cortex. Nature 2011, 474:100-104. 50. Nägerl UV, Bonhoeffer T: Imaging living synapses at the  nanoscale by STED microscopy. J Neurosci 2010, 30:93419346. See annotation to [54]. 51. Ding JB, Takasaki KT, Sabatini BL: Supraresolution imaging in  brain slices using stimulated-emission depletion two-photon laser scanning microscopy. Neuron 2009, 63:429-437. See annotation to [54]. 52. Izeddin I, Specht CG, Lelek M, Darzacq X, Triller A, Zimmer C,  Dahan M: Super-resolution dynamic imaging of dendritic spines using a low-affinity photoconvertible actin probe. PLoS One 2011, 6:e15611. See annotation to [54]. 53. Dani A, Huang B, Bergan J, Dulac C, Zhuang X: Superresolution imaging of chemical synapses in the brain. Neuron 2010,  68:843-856. See annotation to [54]. 54. Urban NT, Willig KI, Hell SW, Nägerl UV: STED nanoscopy of actin dynamics in synapses deep inside living brain slices.  Biophys J 2011, 101:1277-1284. These papers reported the first superresolution imaging of dendritic spines, which overcome the limit of resolution of conventional optical microscopy. 55. Zhou Q, Homma KJ, Poo MM: Shrinkage of dendritic spines  associated with long-term depression of hippocampal synapses. Neuron 2004, 44:749-757. See annotation to [58]. 56. He K, Lee A, Song L, Kanold PO, Lee HK: AMPA receptor subunit GluR1 (GluA1) serine-845 site is involved in synaptic depression but not in spine shrinkage associated with chemical long-term depression. J Neurophysiol 2011, 105:1897-1907. 61. Korobova F, Svitkina T: Molecular architecture of synaptic actin cytoskeleton in hippocampal neurons reveals a mechanism of dendritic spine morphogenesis. Mol Biol Cell 2010, 21:165-176. 62. Krucker T, Siggins GR, Halpain S: Dynamic actin filaments are required for stable long-term potentiation (LTP) in area CA1 of the hippocampus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000, 97:6856-6861. 63. Kim CH, Lisman JE: A role of actin filament in synaptic transmission and long-term potentiation. J Neurosci 1999, 19:4314-4324. 64. Star EN, Kwiatkowski DJ, Murthy VN: Rapid turnover of actin in dendritic spines and its regulation by activity. Nat Neurosci 2002, 5:239-246. 65. Honkura N, Matsuzaki M, Noguchi J, Ellis-Davies GC, Kasai H: The  subspine organization of actin fibers regulates the structure and plasticity of dendritic spines. Neuron 2008, 57:719-729. See annotation to [66]. 66. Frost NA, Shroff H, Kong H, Betzig E, Blanpied TA: Single molecule discrimination of discrete perisynaptic and distributed sites of actin filament assembly within dendritic spines. Neuron 2010, 67:86-99. These papers showed the inward flow of actin from the periphery to the center of the spine. [65] reported the formation of a new stable pool of Factin upon LTP induction. 67. Saneyoshi T, Hayashi Y: Actin cytoskeletal regulation in dendritic spines during synaptic plasticity. Cytoskeleton, In Press. 68. Saneyoshi T, Fortin DA, Soderling TR: Regulation of spine and synapse formation by activity-dependent intracellular signaling pathways. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2010, 20:108-115. 69. Patterson MA, Szatmari EM, Yasuda R: AMPA receptors are exocytosed in stimulated spines and adjacent dendrites in a Ras-ERK-dependent manner during long-term potentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010, 107:15951-15956. 70. Okamoto K, Narayanan R, Lee SH, Murata K, Hayashi Y: The role of CaMKII as an F-actin-bundling protein crucial for maintenance of dendritic spine structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007, 104:6418-6423. 71. Okamoto K, Bosch M, Hayashi Y: The roles of CaMKII and F actin in the structural plasticity of dendritic spines: a potential molecular identity of a synaptic tag? Physiology (Bethesda) 2009, 24:357-366. This review proposed that the accumulation of F-actin and resultant increase in the size of the dendritic spine act as a ‘synaptic tag’. 72. Murakoshi H, Wang H, Yasuda R: Local, persistent activation of Rho GTPases during plasticity of single dendritic spines.  Nature 2011, 472:100-104. This paper demonstrated a spine-specific activation of the Rho family of small G-proteins using FRET-FLIM imaging. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2011, 22:1–6 Please cite this article in press as: Bosch M, Hayashi Y. Structural plasticity of dendritic spines, Curr Opin Neurobiol (2011), doi:10.1016/j.conb.2011.09.002 www.sciencedirect.com