The Ca2+ sensor synaptotagmin-1 and the SNARE complex cooperate to trigger neurotransmitter release. Structural studies elucidated three distinct synaptotagmin-1-SNARE complex binding modes involving polybasic, primary and tripartite interfaces of synaptotagmin-1. We investigated these interactions using NMR and fluorescence spectroscopy. Synaptotagmin-1 binds to the SNARE complex through the polybasic and primary interfaces in solution. Ca2+-free synaptotagmin-1 binds to SNARE complexes anchored on PIP2-containing nanodiscs. R398Q/R399Q and E295A/Y338W mutations at the primary interface, which strongly impair neurotransmitter release, disrupt and enhance synaptotagmin-1-SNARE complex binding, respectively. Ca2+ induces tight binding of synaptotagmin-1 to PIP2-containing nanodiscs, disrupting synaptotagmin-1-SNARE interactions. Specific effects of mutations in the polybasic region on Ca2+-dependent synaptotagmin-1-PIP2-membrane interactions correlate with their effects on release. Our data suggest that synaptotagmin-1 binds to the SNARE complex through the primary interface and that Ca2+ releases this interaction, inducing PIP2/membrane binding and allowing cooperation between synaptotagmin-1 and the SNAREs in membrane fusion to trigger release.

The mechanism of neurotransmitter release has been extensively characterized, showing that vesicle fusion is mediated by the SNARE complex formed by syntaxin‐1, SNAP‐25 and synaptobrevin. This complex is disassembled by N‐ethylmaleimide sensitive factor (NSF) and SNAPs to recycle the SNAREs, whereas Munc18‐1 and Munc13s organize SNARE complex assembly in an NSF‐SNAP‐resistant manner. Synaptotagmin‐1 acts as the Ca2+ sensor that triggers exocytosis in a tight interplay with the SNAREs and complexins. Here, we review technical aspects associated with investigation of protein interactions underlying these steps, which is hindered because the release machinery is assembled between two membranes and is highly dynamic. Moreover, weak interactions, which are difficult to characterize, play key roles in neurotransmitter release, for instance by lowering energy barriers that need to be overcome in this highly regulated process. We illustrate the crucial role that structural biology has played in uncovering mechanisms underlying neurotransmitter release, but also discuss the importance of considering the limitations of the techniques used, including lessons learned from research in our lab and others. In particular, we emphasize: (a) the promiscuity of some protein sequences, including membrane‐binding regions that can mediate irrelevant interactions with proteins in the absence of their native targets; (b) the need to ensure that weak interactions observed in crystal structures are biologically relevant; and (c) the limitations of isothermal titration calorimetry to analyze weak interactions. Finally, we stress that even studies that required re‐interpretation often helped to move the field forward by improving our understanding of the system and providing testable hypotheses.

Characterizing interactions of Synaptotagmin‐1 with the SNARE complex is crucial to understand the mechanism of neurotransmitter release. X‐ray crystallography revealed how the Synaptotagmin‐1 C2B domain binds to the SNARE complex through a so‐called primary interface and to a complexin‐1‐SNARE complex through a so‐called tripartite interface. Mutagenesis and electrophysiology supported the functional relevance of both interfaces, and extensive additional data validated the primary interface. However, ITC evidence suggesting that binding via the tripartite interface occurs in solution was called into question by subsequent NMR data. Here, we describe joint efforts to address this apparent contradiction. Using the same ITC approach with the same C2B domain mutant used previously (C2BKA‐Q) but including ion exchange chromatography to purify it, which is crucial to remove polyacidic contaminants, we were unable to observe the substantial endothermic ITC signal that was previously attributed to binding of this mutant to the complexin‐1‐SNARE complex through the tripartite interface. We were also unable to detect substantial populations of the tripartite interface in NMR analyses of the ITC samples or in measurements of paramagnetic relaxation effects, despite the high sensitivity of this method to detect weak protein complexes. However, these experiments do not rule out the possibility of very low affinity (KD > 1 mm) binding through this interface. These results emphasize the need to develop methods to characterize the structure of synaptotagmin‐1‐SNARE complexes between two membranes and to perform further structure–function analyses to establish the physiological relevance of the tripartite interface.

Two proteins called Sec17 and Sec18 may have a larger role in membrane fusion than is commonly assumed in textbook models.

No abstract