The optimal height of the synaptic cleft

Abstract

Signal integration in the brain is determined by the size and kinetics of rapid synaptic responses. The latter, in turn, depends on the concentration profile of neurotransmitter in the synaptic cleft. According to a traditional view, narrower clefts should correspond to higher intracleft concentrations of neurotransmitter, and therefore to the enhanced activation of synaptic receptors. Here, we argue that narrowing the cleft also increases electrical resistance of the intracleft medium and therefore reduces local receptor currents. We employ detailed theoretical analyses and Monte Carlo simulations to propose that these two contrasting phenomena result in a relatively narrow range of cleft heights at which the synaptic receptor current reaches its maximum. Over a physiological range of synaptic parameters, the ''optimum'' height falls between Ϸ12 and 20 nm. This range is consistent with the structure of central synapses reported by electron microscopy. Therefore, our results suggest that a simple fundamental principle may underlie the synaptic cleft architecture: to maximize synaptic strength.T he waveform of rapid synaptic responses shapes the temporal domain of signal integration in the brain (1, 2). In turn, the kinetics of synaptic receptor currents is constrained by diffusion of neurotransmitter in the synaptic cleft (3, 4). This relationship, however, remains poorly understood, mainly because events inside the cleft are beyond the powers of direct experimental observation. There is little doubt, however, that synaptic cleft geometry is an important factor in shaping synaptic currents (3, 5-7). The straightforward logic of physics predicts that decreasing the cleft height should increase the intracleft concentration of neurotransmitter and therefore enhance activation of synaptic receptors (8). In turn, increasing the lateral cleft size could generally slow down neurotransmitter escape from the cleft and thus prolong synaptic responses (9). Indeed, faster AMPA receptor-mediated EPSCs have recently been associated with smaller synaptic apposition zones in the developing cerebellar synapses (10). However, lateral dimensions of synapses fluctuate considerably (even within homogeneous synaptic populations), whereas the cleft height remains remarkably stable. For instance, at the common excitatory synapses in hippocampal area CA1, the lateral cleft area varies several-fold (11) whereas the cleft height shows the coefficient of variation (an upper estimate) of only Ϸ26% (12). Interestingly, osmotic challenge or other physiological manipulations that affect dramatically the overall extracellular space dimensions (13, 14) do not appear to modify the synaptic cleft height (15). This parameter also remains virtually unchanged during development (16-18). Remarkably, in electron micrographs of synaptosomes (a preparation obtained using strong mechanical forces of centrifugal separation), the distance between the apposing synaptic membranes is indistinguishable from that in the intact neuropil. Across many synaptic type...

Making the connection – shared molecular machinery and evolutionary links underlie the formation and plasticity of occluding junctions and synapses

“…The cleft between membranes at the synapse is ∼15-25 nm, which is similar to that of the pSJ cleft and considered optimal for synaptic function (Savtchenko and Rusakov, 2007). Transmission EM of the well-characterized synapses at the Drosophila neuromuscular junction (NMJ) reveals the presence of regularly spaced electron-dense material in cross section and a honeycomb-like appearance in oblique sections, which both are similar in appearance to the pSJ (Prokop, 1999).…”

Spatial mismatch between the Na + flux and spike initiation in axon initial segment

“…Our evidence therefore indicates that the most proximal AIS segment serves as a resistive spacer element that ensures proper isolation of the distally located trigger zone from the immense somatodendritic electrical load. At any realistic axoplasm resistivity values [which we assumed to be higher than 80 Ω·cm, the artificial cerebrospinal fluid (ACSF) resistivity (25)], AIS relocation further down the axon would not, by itself, be the reason for a decrease in neuronal excitability (24).…”

Input-Specific Intrasynaptic Arrangements of Ionotropic Glutamate Receptors and Their Impact on Postsynaptic Responses

“…Such cleft width has been estimated by carefully calibrated studies and remains relatively constant in many synapses (Peters et al, 1991, Zuber et al, 2005. Moreover, a recent theoretical study has suggested that such width would be optimal for efficient synaptic transmission (Savtchenko and Rusakov, 2007). In contrast to most synaptic contacts in the CNS, RG and CG axon terminals extend well over the IMP cluster area at relay cells because these synapses are formed directly on the dendritic shaft.…”