To the extent possible under law, AOP-Wiki has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to KE:385
Key Event Title
Decrease of synaptogenesis
|Level of Biological Organization|
Key Event Components
Key Event Overview
AOPs Including This Key Event
|AOP Name||Role of event in AOP||Point of Contact||Author Status||OECD Status|
|Binding of antagonist to NMDARs impairs cognition||KeyEvent||Anna Price (send email)||Open for citation & comment||TFHA/WNT Endorsed|
|NIS inhibition and learning and memory impairment||KeyEvent||Anna Price (send email)||Open for citation & comment||TFHA/WNT Endorsed|
|During brain development||High|
Key Event Description
Biological state: Synaptogenesis is a multi-step process that is crucial for brain development and involves the formation of synapses. It follows axonal migration, at which stage presynaptic and postsynaptic differentiation occurs (Garner et al., 2002). "Synaptic assembly" that refers to the gathering of the appropriate components and "synaptic formation" that is defined by the mechanisms involved in recruitment of molecules required for differentiation, stabilization and maturation of synapse, are the main phases that characterise synaptogenesis (Colón-Ramos, 2009). Elimination is a physiological step involved in synaptogenesis regarding the synapses that fail to get stabilised and mature.
The first step is the recognition and the establishment of contact between an axon and a dendritic spine in which pre- and postsynaptic neurons play important role. The presynaptic differentiation occurs followed by excretion of neurotransmitters that bind to appropriate receptors located on the target spine. However, a postsynaptic neuron does not passively receive guidance from a presynaptic axon but are the same dendritic filopodia that gradually are transformed into spines that select and engage their presynaptic neurons. The transformation of dendritic filopodia into dendritic spines that involves the expression of the whole postsynaptic machinery such as postsynaptic density (PSD), receptor subunits, scaffolding proteins and actin cytoskeleton, is the first step to give nascent synapses. However, to become functional and mature these synapses need an important number of cell-cell interactions, including stimulation from glutamatergic synapses as well as the influence of neurotrophic factors (Munno and Syed, 2003).
However, all this is true for glutamatergic synapses because GABAergic synapses do not appear in dendritic spines, but rather form on dendritic shafts, nerve cell somata and axon initial segments. These inhibitory synapses besides their distinct location are also structurally different compared to excitatory synapses (reviewed in Gatto and Broadie, 2010).
Biological compartments: Synaptogenesis is spatially and temporally strictly controlled process. It does not happen in a uniform way in all brain regions and there important differences between the times of appearance of the main two types of synapses (reviewed in Erecinska et al., 2004). For example, in rat hippocampus excitatory synapses are well established or fully mature within the two first postnatal weeks, whereas inhibitory synapses cannot be found prior to PND 18, after which it increases steadily to reach adult levels at PND 28. In addition, in rat neostriatal neurons the excitatory responses to both cortical and thalamic stimuli can be observed by PND 6, but the long-lasting hyperpolarization and late depolarization is never seen before PND 12.
Structural remodelling of synapses and formation of new synaptic contacts has been postulated as a possible mechanism underlying the late phase of long-term potentiation (LTP), a form of plasticity which is involved in learning and memory. LTP induction results in a sequence of morphological changes consisting of a transient remodelling of the postsynaptic membrane followed by a marked increase in the proportion of axon terminals contacting two or more dendritic spines. Three-dimensional reconstruction revealed that these spines arose from the same dendrite. As pharmacological blockade of LTP prevented these morphological changes, it is suggested that LTP is associated with the formation of new, mature and probably functional synapses contacting the same presynaptic terminal and thereby duplicating activated synapses (Erik et al., 2006).
In human, synaptogenesis does not happen at the same time in all brain regions, as the prefrontal cortex lags behind in terms of synapse formation compared to the auditory and visual cortices. In contrast, synaptogenesis appears to proceed concurrently in different brain areas for rhesus monkey (Erecinska et al., 2004).
General role in biology: The period of rapid synaptogenesis or the so-called brain growth spurt is considered one of the most important processes that take place during brain development (Garner et al., 2002). This process is crucial not only in neurodevelopment but also plays a vital role in synaptic plasticity, learning and memory and adaptation throughout life. Without this process no complex brain network can be established as synapse is the fundamental unit of connectivity and communication between neurons (Tau and Peterson, 2010). Cell adhesion represents the most direct way of coordinating synaptic connectivity in the brain. Recent evidence highlights the importance of a trans-synaptic interaction between postsynaptic neuroligins and presynaptic neurexins. These transmembrane molecules bind each other extracellularly to promote adhesion between dendrites and axons, facilitating synapse establishment (Dean and Dresbach, 2006). Furthermore, the number of excitatory versus inhibitory synapses created at single neuron dictates neuronal excitability and function (Schummers et al., 2002).
How It Is Measured or Detected
Methods that have been previously reviewed and approved by a recognized authority should be included in the Overview section above. All other methods, including those well established in the published literature, should be described here. Consider the following criteria when describing each method: 1. Is the assay fit for purpose? 2. Is the assay directly or indirectly (i.e. a surrogate) related to a key event relevant to the final adverse effect in question? 3. Is the assay repeatable? 4. Is the assay reproducible?
There is no OECD advised method for measuring synaptogenesis.
Anatomical methods can be used to structurally estimate the number of excitatory or inhibitory synapses. Immunostaining can be employed with specific antibodies that recognize vesicular glutamate transporters (VGLUTs) and the postsynaptic density protein-95 kDa (PSD-95) that are characteristic of excitatory synapses, while inhibitory synapses are identified by the presence of the vesicular GABA (VGAT) and vesicular inhibitory amino acid (VIAAT) transporters and the postsynaptic adaptor protein gephryin (Gatto and Broadie, 2010). There are commercial available synaptogenesis assay kits that rely on the immunostaining of cells with MAP-2, PSD-95 and synaptophysin. Some other presynaptic (Bassoon) and postsynaptic (ProSAP1/Shank2) markers have been suggested and showed to correlate well with the ultrastructural studies in cultured hippocampus primary cells (Grabrucker et al., 2009). Electron microscopy can also be applied to assess the prevalence of excitatory and inhibitory synapses amongst convergent contacts (Megias et al., 2001). Recently, a high content image analysis based on RNAi screening protocols has been suggested as a useful tool to create imaging algorithm for use in both in vitro and in vivo synaptic punctae analysis (Nieland et al., 2014).
Domain of Applicability
The mechanisms governing synapse formation is considered conserved among both vertebrates and invertebrates (Munno and Syed, 2003). Invertebrates have served as simple animal models to study synapse formation. Indeed, Colón-Ramos (2009) has recently reviewed the early developmental events that take place in the process of synaptogenesis pointing out the importance of this process in neural network formation and function. The experimental evaluation of synaptogenesis has been performed using invertebrates and in particular C. elegans and Drosophila as well as vertebrates (Colón-Ramos, 2009).
This vulnerable period of synaptogenesis appears to happen in different developmental stages across species. For example, in rodents primarily synaptogenesis occurs during the first two weeks after birth (Bai et al., 2013). For rhesus monkeys, this period ranges from approximately 115-day gestation up to PND 60 (Bai et al., 2013). In humans, it starts from the third trimester of pregnancy and continues 2-3 years following birth (Bai et al., 2013).
Bai X, Twaroski D, Bosnjak ZJ. (2013) Modeling anesthetic developmental neurotoxicity using human stem cells. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 17: 276-287.
Colón -Ramos DA. (2009) Synapse formation in developing neural circuits. Curr Top Devel Biol. 87: 53-79.
Dean C, Dresbach T. (2006) Neuroligins and neurexins: linking cell adhesion, synapse formation and cognitive function. Trends Neurosci. 29:21-29.
Erecinska M, Cherian S, Silver IA. (2004) Energy metabolism in mammalian brain during development. Prog Neurobiol. 73: 397-445.
Erik I. Charyc, Barbara F. Akum, Joshua S. Goldber, Rebecka J. Jörnsten, Christopher Rongo, James Q. Zheng and Bonnie L. Firestein. Activity-Independent Regulation of Dendrite Patterning by Postsynaptic Density Protein PSD-95. Journal of Neuroscience 2006, 26(40): 10164-10176.
Garner CC, Zhai RC, Gundelfinger ED, Ziv NE. (2002) Molecular mechanisms of CNS synaptogenesis. Cell Press 25: 243-250.
Gatto CL, Broadie K. (2010) Genetic controls balancing excitatory and inhibitory synaptogenesis in neurodevelopmental disorder models. Front Syn Neurosci. 2: 4.
Grabrucker A, Vaida B, Bockmann J, Boeckers TM. (2009) Synaptogenesis of hippocampal neurons in primary cell culture. Cell Tissue Res. 338: 333-341.
Megias M, Emri Z, Freund TF, Gulyas AI. (2001) Total number and distribution of inhibitory and excitatory synapses on hippocampal CA1 pyramidal cells. Neuroscience 102: 527-540.
Munno DW, Syed NI. (2003) Synaptogenesis in the CNS: an odyssey from wiring together to firing together. J Physiol. 552: 1-11.
Nieland TJF, Logan DJ, Saulnier J, Lam D, Johnson C, et al. (2014) High Content Image Analysis Identifies Novel Regulators of Synaptogenesis in a High-Throughput RNAi Screen of Primary Neurons. PLoS ONE. 9: e91744.
Schummers J, Mariño J, Sur M. (2002) Synaptic integration by V1 neurons depends on location within the orientation map. Neuron. 36: 969-978.
Tau GZ, Peterson BS. (2010) Normal Development of Brain Circuits. Neuropsychopharmacology 35: 147-168.