Correspondence to: Ehud Y. Isacoff, Department of Molecular & Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, 271 Life Sciences Addition, Berkeley, CA 94720-3200. Fax:510-643-6791 E-mail:eisacoff{at}socrates.berkeley.edu.
Released online: 14 February 2000
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Voltage-gated potassium channels are composed of four subunits. Voltage-dependent activation of these channels consists of a depolarization-triggered series of charge-carrying steps that occur in each subunit. These major charge-carrying steps are followed by cooperative step(s) that lead to channel opening. Unlike the late cooperative steps, the major charge-carrying steps have been proposed to occur independently in each of the channel subunits. In this paper, we examine this further. We showed earlier that the two major charge-carrying steps are associated with two sequential outward transmembrane movements of the charged S4 segment. We now use voltage clamp fluorometry to monitor these S4 movements in individual subunits of heterotetrameric channels. In this way, we estimate the influence of one subunit's S4 movement on another's when the energetics of their transmembrane movements differ. Our results show that the first S4 movement occurs independently in each subunit, while the second occurs cooperatively. At least part of the cooperativity appears to be intrinsic to the second S4 charge-carrying rearrangement. Such cooperativity in gating of voltage-dependent channels has great physiological relevance since it can affect both action potential threshold and rate of propagation.
Key Words: potassium channel, cooperativity, fluorescence, voltage-sensing, gating
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The model of
While the description of Hodgkin and Huxley captures some of the essential features of voltage-dependent gating (four identical gating particles, a sequence of transitions that yields sigmoidicity to channel opening), it has required two major modifications to account for the details of potassium channel gating. First, voltage sensor movement occurs not in one but in several steps (
Cooperativity in channel activation represents an issue of fundamental importance for understanding the mechanics of channel function. Subunit interaction in activation is expected to have important physiological consequences by influencing voltage sensitivity in the same way that cooperative interaction among binding sites affects the sensitivity of an allosteric protein to ligand concentration. Such cooperativity could account for the discrepancies previously described between voltage sensitivity and number of charges in S4 (
Recent studies from the Aldrich laboratory have demonstrated a role for S4 in cooperativity in channel activation (
In this study, we used a novel approach to examine subunit interaction during activation. We did this by taking advantage of the ability of voltage-clamp fluorometry (
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Molecular Biology
Experiments were performed on nonconducting, ball-deleted ShH4 (W434F/6-46) Shaker channels (
For the coinjection experiments, a S352C:L382V or S352C/L382V:wild-type ratio of 1.5:8.5 was used to maximize the fraction of channels containing only one fluorophore binding subunit. For free association between subunits, these ratios are predicted to yield 52, 37, 10, 1, and ~0% channels with zero, one, two, three, or four labeled subunits, respectively, so that ~62% of the fluorescence will come from channels with one labeled subunit.
We ensured that linked heterotetrameric constructs with one labeled subunit produced channels with the subunit stoichiometry defined by their tandem linkage in two ways: (a) by comparing linked tetramers, such as A-B-B-B, to coinjections of cRNAs A + B at a ratio that favored B by 5.7-fold (this comparison produced identical results for studies with the L382V mutation); (b) by attempting to reduce the opportunity for intermolecular assembly of tetramers and favoring intramolecular assembly. This was done by injecting progressively more diluted cRNA encoding the linked tetramers to express channel protein at low enough levels so that the highest chance of interaction in endoplasmic reticulum would be between subunits of the same nascent protein. For the linked tetramer C*/S-W-W-W (S352C-TMRM/R365S linked to three wild-type subunits; Fig 1) at high levels of expression there was a positive f1, with no voltage shift, and a negative f2, with a very minor leftward voltage shift, consistent with channels containing multiple C*/S subunits due to intermolecular assemblyprecisely the situation we need to avoid. At fourfold lower expression levels of C*/S-W-W-W, both f1 and f2 were positive, f1 was not shifted, and f2 was shifted far to the left. Further lowering of expression did not change the behavior. The results are consistent with intertetramer assembly at high expression levels, but not over the range of lower expression levels on which we based our analysis.
|
Voltage Clamp Fluorometry
Voltage clamp fluorometry, oocyte preparation and incubation, and tetraglycine maleimide (TGM)1 blocking were performed as described earlier (
TGM was synthesized by incubating 25 mM tetraglycine (TG; Aldrich Chemical Co.), dissolved in 0.1 M NaCl, 0.1 M Naphosphate, pH 7.25, with 10 mM succinimidyl trans-4-(N-maleimidylmethyl)cicloexane-1-carboxylate (SMCC; Molecular Probes) for 1 h at 37°C. TGM was purified from the unreacted components by HPLC, using a semipreparative C18 reversed phase column, and an acetonitrile gradient (+0.1% trifluoroacetic acid). TGM concentration was measured according to
The two-electrode voltage clamping was performed with a CA-1 amplifier (Dagan Corp.). External solution was NaMES (110 mM NaMES, 2 mM Ca(MES)2, 10 mM HEPES, pH 7.5). Capacitance compensation was performed from a holding potential of +60 mV (or +100 mV for channels carrying the L382V mutation). A photomultiplier tube (HC120-05; Hamamatsu Phototonics) was used for fluorescence measurements.
Since fluorophore attachment could alter gating, and interaction between fluorophores bound to neighboring subunits could alter the fluorescence report of gating movements, two means were used to ensure that differences in fluorescencevoltage relations (f-v's) between channels did not arise from differences in the number of labeled subunits per channel. First, f-v's were compared, and found to be similar, in channels composed of subunits with similar voltage dependence, but with a different number of labeled subunits (e.g., see Fig 7 B). Second, photodestruction of TMRM molecules bound to the 352C homotetramer (labeled to saturation) produced only a small (<5 mV) leftward shift in the f-v (Fig 2). This indicates that TMRMTMRM interaction between subunits had no significant effect on our comparisons, and that, if anything, it led to a slight underestimate of the degree of the cooperative influence. Nevertheless, to avoid this complication, comparisons were also made between channels made of distinct subunits, but in which only one subunit was labeled (Fig 7 B).
|
|
|
|
|
|
All comparisons were made within the same batch of oocytes in the same experiment under the same labeling conditions. Values are reported as mean ± SEM.
Data Analysis
Chargevoltage (q-v) and fluorescencevoltage (f-v) relations were obtained using Clampfit 6 (Axon Instruments). q-v's were constructed from the integrated "off" gating currents, evoked by repolarizations to -80 mV, after long enough depolarizations (25500 ms) for the "on" gating current to decay to completion. f-v's were constructed from the amplitudes of the on fluorescence changes. Although detailed models of Shaker activation may require functions more complicated than Boltzmann to describe Shaker's q-v, it has been shown that Boltzmann functions fit very well the q-v curves of wild-type and mutant Shaker channels (
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
We designed a method to exclusively monitor a specific set of Shaker protein rearrangements in single subunits during channel gating transitions. The method was based on three elements.
First, a cysteine substitution at S352 near the outer end of S4 allowed for the site-specific attachment of a sulfhydryl-reactive fluorescent probe. As shown earlier (
To monitor the activation movements of S4, position S352C in S3S4, near the NH2 terminus of S4, was labeled with TMRM (see MATERIALS AND METHODS). Homotetramers made of S352C labeled with TMRM (C*) showed large fluorescence changes in response to voltage steps (Fig 3 A), with a steady state fluorescencevoltage relation that was statistically indistinguishable from the voltage dependence of gating charge movement (q-v) (Fig 3 B). This indicates that C* fluorescence can serve as a reporter of S4's charge-carrying conformational changes in a labeled subunit.
Evidence for Cooperativity in Channel Activation
The first voltage-shifting mutation chosen was L382V (
To examine how interactions between wild-type and V subunits influence S4 activation rearrangements, subunits that were wild type except for the cysteine labeling site substitution were coexpressed with unlabelable V subunits, or labelable V subunits were coexpressed with unlabelable wild-type subunits (W; Fig 1 A).
Complementary RNAs (cRNAs) encoding the S352C subunit and the V subunit were coinjected into oocytes in a ratio chosen to optimize the number of channels containing three V subunits and one fluorophore-binding S352C subunit (Fig 1 A, and see MATERIALS AND METHODS), and then labeled with TMRM. The f-v of the S352C-TMRM (C*) subunit in these heterotetramers (C* + V in Fig 4 A) was shallower and shifted to the right with respect to the C* homotetramers, approaching the shallow depolarized component of the V homotetramers (Fig 4 A). The same result was obtained when subunit stoichiometry was constrained by using the linked tetramer C*-V-V-V (Fig 4 B). The effect on the single C* subunit of the three V subunits was strong enough to make the f-v indistinguishable from that of the homotetramer of the double mutant 352C*/382V (C*/V) (Fig 4A and Fig C).
In contrast to the pronounced influence of the V subunits on the C* subunit's rearrangements at positive voltages, the foot of the f-v of the C* subunit was not shifted toward the q-v of the V homotetramer (Fig 4 A). This suggests that interactions between subunits affect late transitions, but not early transitions.
The voltage-shifting influence of the three V subunits on a single C* subunit could result from a strong cooperative influence of the V subunits, or, alternatively, the L382V mutation may eliminate a cooperative interaction that normally makes the q-v comparatively steep. To distinguish between these possibilities, we determined whether a V subunit remains sensitive to the cooperative influence exerted by wild-type subunits. This was done in channels composed of a single labeled C*/V subunit and three W subunits. In both coinjection of C*/V cRNA with an excess of W cRNA, and expression of the linked tetramer C*/V-W-W-W, the f-v's generated by the single C*/V subunit combined with three W subunits were virtually the same as the f-v of the C*/V homotetramers (Fig 4 C). The gating currents of the C*/V-W-W-W channels, three quarters of which should be generated by W subunits, were intermediate in kinetics between those of the C*/V homotetramer and the W homotetramer (Fig 5). These results demonstrate that the L382V mutation renders the subunit insensitive to cooperative influence on its S4 movement by wild-type subunits (Fig 6), a remarkable effect that leaves the L382V subunit operating independently.
A Charge Neutralizing Mutation Better Resolves Charge Carrying Movements of S4
The above results suggest that early steps in activation are independent and that late steps are cooperative. However, the early and late charge carrying transitions could not be resolved in the f-v's of C*-V-V-V and C*/V-W-W-W (Fig 4), preventing us from precisely identifying the cooperative step(s). This loss of resolution is due to the combined influence of the cysteine mutation at S352 and to its conjugation with TMRM, as found earlier for the double mutant A359C-TMRM/L382V (
To determine more clearly which activation movement of S4 is cooperative, we employed another voltage-shifting mutation, R365S. Like other neutralizations of this second arginine in S4 (
As we have previously shown (
|
The good correlation between f1 and q1, and between f2 and q2 (Fig 7 A), indicates that TMRM at 352 reports on both steps of transmembrane S4 movement, making it possible to determine if the cooperative interactions occur during one or both of these charge carrying transitions.
Of the Two Sequential Transmembrane Charge Carrying Movements of S4, the First Appears to be Independent and the Second Cooperative
In the following experiments, the subunit carrying both the S352C and R365S mutations was labeled with TMRM (C*/S), and the S4 movements of this voltage-shifted subunit were examined in three contexts (Fig 1 B): (a) in C*/S homotetramers, (b) in linked C*/S-S-S-S heterotetramers, made of one C*/S subunit and three unlabeled voltage-shifted R365S subunits (S), and (c) in linked C*/S-W-W-W heterotetramers, made of one C*/S subunit and three unlabeled wild-type subunits. The rationale behind these experiments was that comparison of the fluorescence of C*/S in these channels should make it possible to resolve the influence of wild-type subunits on the q1 and q2 steps of S4 movement.
The f-v of the C*/S homotetramers was virtually indistinguishable from that of the linked tetramer C*/S-S-S-S (Fig 7 B and Table 1). In contrast, activation gating of the single C*/S reporter subunit was clearly influenced by its coassembly with three W subunits (Fig 7 B). This influence was seen not only in the voltage dependence of fluorescence, but also in the direction of the f2 fluorescence change, which became positive (Fig 7 B and 8, right). A free parameter fit of the C*/S-W-W-W f-v to the sum of two Boltzmann functions gave an estimate for the v1/2 of f2 that was significantly different (P = 1.2 x 10-6) from that of C*/S-S-S-S. The three W subunits shifted the v1/2 of the C*/S f2 in the hyperpolarized direction, so that it approached the v1/2 of the f2 of W homotetramers (Fig 9 A, solid line; Table 1). In other words, the W subunits exerted a cooperative influence in f2. Unlike the evidence for cooperativity in f2, the f1 estimated from the free fit of the C*/S-W-W-W f-v to the sum of two Boltzmann functions was not significantly different from that of C*/S-S-S-S (Table 1), indicating that the q1 transition in the reporter subunit is not substantially influenced by the other subunits in the channel. This is consistent with the absence of a shift toward more depolarized voltages in the foot of the f-v of the C*/S-W-W-W tetramer.
|
|
The above conclusion that W subunits affected q2 but not q1 motion of the C*/S subunit S4 is supported by the fact that the f-v of C*/S-W-W-W was closely approximated by the sum of two fixed Boltzmann functions, one having the voltage parameters of the f1 of C*/S-S-S-S, and the other having the voltage parameters of the q2 of W homotetramers (Fig 9 B, solid line). In contrast, a double Boltzmann composed of the opposite combination of parameter values (the f1 from the q1 of W homotetramers and f2 of C*/S-S-S-S), failed to fit the f-v of C*/S-W-W-W (Fig 9 B, dotted line). Finally, a sum of two Boltzmann functions made of both f1 and f2 of C*/S-S-S-S, but with reversed f2 polarity, also did not fit the data (Fig 9 B, dashed line).
In summary, the good agreement between the f1 of C*/S-W-W-W and that of C*/S-S-S-S points to an absence of cooperativity in q1. The large shift to the left of the C*/S subunit's f2 in C*/S-W-W-W channels, towards the q2 values of W homotetramers, is consistent with a strong cooperativity in the q2 movement of S4.
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
In this paper, we used a new approach to study interactions between subunits in heteromeric membrane proteins. This method relies on the use of cysteine mutagenesis to introduce an attachment site for a thiol-reactive fluorophore into a specific functional domain of a subunit. These modified subunits are coexpressed with subunits that cannot be labeled because they do not contain accessible cysteines. In this manner, fluorescence measurements only monitor the structural rearrangements of the labeled domain in particular subunits without interference from signals in unlabeled subunits. This approach makes it possible to define how rearrangements in a specific domain of one subunit, such as those evoked by voltage change or ligand binding, are coupled to functional rearrangements in other subunits of a multimeric protein. The advantage of studying cooperativity in this manner is that it provides a clear indication of subunit interaction, circumventing the need to dissect apart gating or ionic currents, which are governed by the complex ensemble properties of all of the gating domains in each of the channel's subunits.
For this method to work, two criteria need to be met: (a) the fluorophore should report only on the conformational changes of the subunit to which it is bound, and (b) the fluorescence report of conformational rearrangements should not be distorted by interaction between fluorophores bound to multiple subunits of the same channel. In this context, we have shown that Shaker channels carrying the substitution S352C labeled with TMRM (C*) fulfill these two criteria. With respect to the first criterion, we showed that the fluorophore bound to this site is not sensitive to gating movements in neighboring subunits, since the f-v's of two distinct subunits (C*/V and C*/S) are different although they have the same three neighboring subunits (three Ws in the tetramers C*/V-W-W-W and C*/S-W-W-W; Fig 4 and Fig 7; Table 1). Further, the f-v of C*/V was the same whether associated with the same subunits in the homotetramer C*/V or with different subunits in the heterotetramer C*/V-W-W-W (Fig 4 C). The second criterion was met in that, despite the difference in the number of labeled subunits, the f-v's of C*/V and C*/S homotetramers, with four labeled subunits, were found to be equivalent to those of the linked heterotetramers C*/V-W-W-W and C*/S-S-S-S, with only one labeled subunit (Fig 4 C and 7 B). This data is consistent with evidence that the S3S4 loop of one subunit is far enough away from the S3S4 loops of other subunits to allow for their simultaneous binding of multiple molecules of the peptide hanatoxin (
We used this approach to determine whether activation during gating involves cooperative interactions between subunits of the Shaker potassium channel. Our results, using two mutations that exert distinct effects on channel activation, indicate that a specific step of voltage sensing is cooperative, while another is independent. This cooperativity influences both the energetics of specific S4 activation states and the conformation of S4 or of the protein that immediately surrounds it.
Independent and Cooperative Steps in Activation
Our results with both the mutation L382V and R365S indicate that cooperative interactions occur in late activation transitions, but not in early ones. The results were particularly informative with the mutation R365S, which neutralizes the second basic residue in S4. This arginine is one of the key positive charges in S4. During activation it traverses practically the entire membrane-spanning protein and membrane electric field (
We took advantage of the easily resolved q1 and q2 gating charge movements in S352C-TMRM/R365S subunits to correlate cooperative interactions with specific S4 activation movements using fluorescence. We found that the q1 gating rearrangement is insensitive to the identity of the other subunits in the tetramer. In contrast, the q2 rearrangement is significantly influenced by the other subunits. Thus, in the context of the q1q2 model of gating charge movement, the results are consistent with cooperative interactions occurring only in q2.
Cooperative Interactions Affect Subunit Conformation
As shown in Fig 3, upon depolarization, the S352C-TMRM homotetramers produce a fluorescence increase throughout the voltage range. The same is true for homotetramers of S352C-TMRM/L382V, despite the shift by the L382V mutation of the late charge carrying step to more depolarized voltages (Fig 4 C). Although it is difficult to resolve distinct charge carrying components in these two homotetramers, it appears that all the major steps of S4 movement produce increases in fluorescence with activation for this labeling position. In contrast, although the f1 component of S352C-TMRM/R365S homotetramers also increases fluorescence with depolarization, f2 decreases fluorescence with depolarization (Fig 7 A). Since fluorescence depends on the local fluorophore environment, this reversal of the direction of f2 indicates that the mutation R365S not only alters the relative energetics of S4 gating states, but that it also alters the conformation of the S3S4 loop at position 352, and/or of its protein surround.
Interestingly, we found that the identity of the amino acid at position 365 is not the sole determinant of the ratio of brightness of the intermediate state versus the fully activated state for that subunit's S352C-TMRM. Coassembly of one C*/S subunit with three W subunits restored the direction of the f2 fluorescence change to that of C*, with the fully activated state being brighter than the intermediate state (Fig 7 B and 8). This indicates that subunit interaction during gating affects the protein conformation either of the S3S4 or of the protein microenvironment around S3S4. In summary, interaction between subunits influences: (a) the energetics of an S4's intermediate and fully extruded states, and (b) the conformation of the segment just external to S4 (or of its protein surround).
The cooperativity observed in q2 could be "intrinsic" to S4, in the sense that the transmembrane state of one S4 could directly or indirectly influence that of S4 in other subunits. Alternatively, the cooperativity could result from an "extrinsic" influence of other coupled transitions. The basis of this cooperativity is examined in the next two sections.
Possible Basis of Cooperativity in the Second Step of Outward S4 Movement
Measurements of ionic and gating currents by the Aldrich and Sigworth labs have led to models of Shaker channel activation that consist of two or three major charge carrying transitions that occur independently in each subunit. These are followed by a concerted step that: (a) either directly opens the channel, or immediately precedes channel opening, (b) carries between 1.4 and 1.8 e0 per channel, and (c) is strongly forward biased (
Our experiments are consistent with the q2 phase of S4 charge movement being cooperative. According to the models described above, q2 movements are intrinsically independent, but could be made functionally cooperative by being tightly coupled to an ensuing forward biased concerted transition. In this context, the apparent cooperativity of S4 would depend on the ratio of the forward and backward rate constants of the concerted transition for each contributing subunit. A prediction of such a model is that heteromeric channels composed of mixtures of W subunits (having a strongly forward-biased concerted transition) and V subunits (in which the same transition is slightly backward biased) would be expected to have an intermediate behavior weighted by the number of each subunit type. If the q2 movement of S4 borrowed cooperativity from the concerted step, then the S4 of a single V subunit should still experience cooperative influence from the three W subunits. Therefore, channels made of one V and three W subunits should still have a strongly forward-biased concerted step. Our results do not support this prediction. Instead, they show that the S4 of a V subunit is not influenced at all by other subunits with which it coassembles. This implies that the L382V mutation affects more than just the rates of the concerted step. One possibility is that the mutation directly eliminates an intrinsic cooperativity of q2.
How Are Subunits Coupled to Each Other?
Our results suggest that the intermediate to fully extruded motion of S4 is intrinsically cooperative. But how does the transmembrane state of one S4 affect that of S4 in other subunits? We have two possible indications about this mechanism. The first is the dependence of the q2 cooperativity on L382. L382 is located at the internal end of S4, in a segment that is not buried in the protein even when S4 is fully extruded at positive voltages (
Conclusions
We have used single subunit fluorescence to obtain evidence for cooperativity in a charge-carrying voltage sensor movement of S4 during the activation of Shaker potassium channel. Of the two sequential outward steps that S4 takes in response to membrane depolarization, the first appears to occur independently in the four subunits, and the second step appears to be cooperative. This cooperative interaction between subunits not only affects the relative energetics of specific S4 gating states, but also changes the conformation of the S3S4 loop with respect to its protein environment. With this method in hand, it should now be possible to identify the structures that couple gating movements of the S4s of different subunits, and S4 movements to Shaker channel gates.
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
1 Abbreviations used in this paper: f-v, fluorescencevoltage; TGM, tetraglycine maleimide; TMRM, tetramethylrhodamine-5-maleimide; q-v, chargevoltage.
![]() |
Acknowledgements |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
We thank L. Llewelyn for making the dimer and tetramer linked constructs, O. Baker, P. Larsson, H. Lecar, J. Ngai, M. Moronne, E. Loots, C. Gandhi, M. McGrath, and all the other members of the lab for helpful discussions.
L.M. Mannuzzu was supported by a post-doctoral fellowship from the American Heart Association (AHA), California Affiliate (95-41). This work was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NS35549-03) and AHA, California Affiliate (96-248A).
Submitted: 9 November 1999
Revised: 24 January 2000
Accepted: 24 January 2000
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Baker, O.S., Larsson, H.P., Mannuzzu, L.M., Isacoff, E.Y. 1998. Three transmembrane conformations and sequence-dependent displacement of the S4 domain in Shaker K+ channel gating. Neuron. 20:1283-1294[Medline].
Bezanilla, F., Perozo, E., Stefani, E. 1994. Gating of Shaker K+ channels: II. The components of gating currents and a model of channel activation. Biophys. J 66:1011-1021[Abstract].
Cha, A., Bezanilla, F. 1997. Characterizing voltage-dependent conformational changes in the Shaker K+ channel with fluorescence. Neuron. 19:1127-1140[Medline].
Cha, A., Bezanilla, F. 1998. Structural implications of fluorescence quenching in the Shaker K+ channel. J. Gen. Physiol. 112:391-408
Chapman, M.L., VanDongen, H.M.A., VanDongen, A.M.J. 1997. Activation-dependent subconductance levels in the drk1 K channel suggest a subunit basis for ion permeation and gating. Biophys. J. 72:708-719[Abstract].
Durell, S.R., Hao, Y., Guy, H.R. 1998. Structural model of the transmembrane region of voltage-gated and other K+ channel in open, closed, and inactivated conformations. J. Struct. Biol. 121:263-284[Medline].
Greenblatt, R.E., Blatt, Y., Montal, M. 1985. The structure of the voltage-sensitive sodium channel. Inferences derived from computer-aided analysis of the Electrophorus electricus channel primary structure. FEBS Lett. 193:125-134[Medline].
Guy, H.R., Seetharamulu, P. 1986. Molecular model of the action potential sodium channel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 83:508-512[Abstract].
Hodgkin, A.L., Huxley, A.F. 1952. A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. J. Physiol. 117:500-544[Medline].
Hoshi, T., Zagotta, W.N., Aldrich, R.W. 1990. Biophysical and molecular mechanisms of Shaker potassium channel inactivation. Science. 250:533-538[Medline].
Hoshi, T., Zagotta, W.N., Aldrich, R.W. 1994. Shaker potassium channel gating. I: Transitions near the open state. J. Gen. Physiol. 103:249-278[Abstract].
Hurst, R.S., Kavanaugh, M.P., Yakel, J., Adelman, J.P., North, R.A. 1992. Cooperative interactions among subunits of a voltage-dependent potassium channel. Evidence from expression of concatenated cDNAs. J. Biol. Chem. 267:23742-23745
Isacoff, E.Y., Jan, Y.N., Jan, L.Y. 1990. Evidence for the formation of heteromultimeric potassium channels in Xenopus oocytes. Nature. 345:530-534[Medline].
Kamb, A., Iverson, L.E., Tanouye, M.A. 1987. Molecular characterization of Shaker, a Drosophila gene that encodes a potassium channel. Cell. 50:405-413[Medline].
Larsson, H.P., Baker, O.S., Dhillon, D.S., Isacoff, E.Y. 1996. Transmembrane movement of the Shaker K+ channel S4. Neuron. 16:387-397[Medline].
Ledwell, J.L., Aldrich, R.W. 1999. Mutations in the S4 region isolate the final voltage-dependent cooperative step in potassium channel activation. J. Gen. Physiol. 113:389-414
Lin, L., McCormack, K., Sigworth, F.J. 1994. Subunit interactions in Shaker K+ channel gating. Biophys. J. 66:A106. (Abstr.).
Liu, Y., Holmgren, M., Jurman, M.E., Yellen, G. 1997. Gated access to the pore of a voltage-dependent K+ channel. Neuron. 19:175-184[Medline].
Lopez, G.A., Jan, Y.N., Jan, L.Y. 1991. Hydrophobic substitution mutations in the S4 sequence alter voltage-dependent gating in Shaker K+ channels. Neuron. 7:327-336[Medline].
MacKinnon, R. 1991. Determination of the subunit stoichiometry of a voltage-activated potassium channel. Nature. 350:232-235[Medline].
Mannuzzu, L.M., Moronne, M.M., Isacoff, E.Y. 1996. Direct physical measure of conformational rearrangement underlying potassium channel gating. Science. 271:213-216[Abstract].
McCormack, K., Tanouye, M.A., Iverson, L.E., Lin, J.W., Ramaswami, M., McCormack, T., Campanelli, J.T., Mathew, M.K., Rudy, B. 1991. A role of hydrophobic residues in the voltage-dependent gating of Shaker K+ channel. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 88:2931-2935[Abstract].
McCormack, K., Joiner, W.J., Heinemann, S.H. 1994. A characterization of the activating structural rearrangements in voltage-dependent Shaker K+ channels. Neuron. 12:301-315[Medline].
Noda, M., Shimizu, S., Tanabe, T., Takai, T., Kayano, T., Ikeda, T., Takahashi, H., Nakayama, H., Kanaoka, Y., Minamino, N. et al. 1984. Primary structure of Electrophorus electricus sodium channel deduced from cDNA sequence. Nature. 312:121-127[Medline].
Papazian, D.M., Shao, X.M., Seoh, S.A., Mock, A.F., Huang, Y., Wainstock, D.H. 1995. Electrostatic interactions of S4 voltage sensor in Shaker K+ channel. Neuron. 14:1293-1301[Medline].
Papazian, D.M., Timpe, L.C., Jan, Y.N., Jan, L.Y. 1991. Alteration of voltage-dependence of Shaker potassium channel by mutations in the S4 sequence. Nature. 349:305-310[Medline].
Perozo, E., MacKinnon, R., Bezanilla, F., Stefani, E. 1993. Gating currents from a nonconducting mutant reveal open-closed conformations in Shaker K+ channels. Neuron. 11:353-358[Medline].
Perozo, E., Santacruz-Toloza, L., Stefani, E., Bezanilla, F., Papazian, D.M. 1994. S4 mutations alter gating currents of Shaker K channels. Biophys. J. 66:345-354[Abstract].
Schoppa, N.E., McCormack, K., Tanouye, M.A., Sigworth, F.J. 1992. The size of gating charge in wild-type and mutant Shaker potassium channels. Science. 255:1712-1715[Medline].
Schoppa, N.E., Sigworth, F.J. 1998a. Activation of Shaker potassium channels. I. Characterization of voltage-dependent transitions. J. Gen. Physiol. 111:271-294
Schoppa, N.E., Sigworth, F.J. 1998b. Activation of Shaker potassium channels. II. Kinetics of the V2 mutant channel. J. Gen. Physiol. 111:295-311
Schoppa, N.E., Sigworth, F.J. 1998c. Activation of Shaker potassium channels. III. An activation gating model for wild-type and V2 mutant channels. J. Gen. Physiol. 111:313-342
Sedlak, J., Lindsay, R.H. 1968. Estimation of total, protein-bound, and nonprotein sulfhydryl groups in tissue with Ellman's reagent. Anal. Biochem. 25:192-205[Medline].
Seoh, S.A., Sigg, D., Papazian, D.M., Bezanilla, F. 1996. Voltage-sensing residues in the S2 and S4 segments of the Shaker K+ channel. Neuron. 16:1159-1167[Medline].
Sigg, D., Stefani, E., Bezanilla, F. 1994. Gating current noise produced by elementary transitions in Shaker potassium channels. Science. 264:578-582[Medline].
Sigworth, F.J. 1994. Voltage gating of ion channels. Q. Rev. Biophys. 27:1-40[Medline].
Smith-Maxwell, C.J., Ledwell, J.L., Aldrich, R.W. 1998a. Role of the S4 in cooperativity of voltage-dependent potassium channel activation. J. Gen. Physiol. 111:399-420
Smith-Maxwell, C.J., Ledwell, J.L., Aldrich, R.W. 1998b. Uncharged S4 residues and cooperativity in voltage-dependent potassium channel activation. J. Gen. Physiol. 111:421-439
Starace, D.M., Stefani, E., Bezanilla, F. 1997. Voltage-dependent proton transport by the voltage sensor of the Shaker K+ channel. Neuron. 19:1319-1327[Medline].
Stefani, E., Toro, L., Perozo, E., Bezanilla, F. 1994. Gating of Shaker K+ channels: I. Ionic and gating currents. Biophys. J. 66:996-1010[Abstract].
Stühmer, W., Conti, F., Stocker, M., Pongs, O., Heinemann, S.H. 1991. Gating currents of inactivating and non-inactivating potassium channels expressed in Xenopus oocytes. Pflügers Arch. 418:423-429.
Stühmer, W., Ruppersberg, J.P., Schroter, K.H., Sakmann, B., Stocker, M., Giese, K.P., Perschke, A., Baumann, A., Pongs, O. 1989. Molecular basis of functional diversity of voltage-gated potassium channels in mammalian brain. EMBO (Eur. Mol. Biol. Organ.) J. 8:3235-3244[Abstract].
Swartz, K.J., MacKinnon, R. 1997a. Hanatoxin modifies the gating of a voltage-dependent K+ channel through multiple binding sites. Neuron. 18:665-673[Medline].
Swartz, K.J., MacKinnon, R. 1997b. Mapping the receptor site for hanatoxin, a gating modifier of voltage-dependent K+ channels. Neuron. 18:675-682[Medline].
Tang, C.Y., Papazian, D.M. 1997. Transfer of voltage independence from a rat olfactory channel to the Drosophila ether-á-go-go K+ channel. J. Gen. Physiol. 109:301-311
Tiwari-Woodruff, S.K., Schulteis, C.T., Mock, A.F., Papazian, D.M. 1997. Electrostatic interactions between transmembrane segments mediate folding of Shaker K+ channel subunits. Biophys. J. 72:1489-1500[Abstract].
Tytgat, J., Hess, P. 1992. Evidence for cooperative interactions in potassium channel gating. Nature. 359:420-423[Medline].
Yang, N., George, A.L., Jr., Horn, R. 1996. Molecular basis of charge movement in voltage-gated sodium channels. Neuron. 16:113-122[Medline].
Yang, N., Horn, R. 1995. Evidence for voltage-dependent S4 movement in sodium channels. Neuron. 15:213-218[Medline].
Yusaf, S.P., Wray, D., Sivaprasadarao, A. 1996. Measurement of the movement of the S4 segment during the activation of a voltage-gated potassium channel. Pflügers Arch. 433:91-97[Medline].
Zagotta, W.N., Hoshi, T., Dittman, J., Aldrich, R.W. 1994a. Shaker potassium channel gating. II: Transitions in the activation pathway. J. Gen. Physiol. 103:279-319[Abstract].
Zagotta, W.N., Hoshi, T., Aldrich, R.W. 1994b. Shaker potassium channel gating. III: Evaluation of kinetic models for activation. J. Gen. Physiol. 103:321-362[Abstract].
Zheng, J., Sigworth, F.J. 1997. Selectivity changes during activation of mutant Shaker potassium channels. J. Gen. Physiol. 110:101-117
Zheng, J., Sigworth, F.J. 1998. Intermediate conductances during deactivation of heteromultimeric Shaker potassium channels. J. Gen. Physiol. 112:457-474