$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The beautifully-characterized Drosophila larval neuromuscular junction (NMJ) glutamatergic synapse model has been used to study synapse formation and function with a vast spectrum of genetic perturbations1. The motor neuron terminal consists of multiple axon branches, each with many enlarged synaptic boutons. These capacious varicosities (up to 5 µm in diameter) contain all of the neurotransmission machinery, including uniform glutamatergic synaptic vesicles (SVs; ~40 nm in diameter) in cytosolic reserve and readily-releasable pools2. These vesicles dock at the presynaptic plasma membrane fusion site active zones (AZs), where exocytosis mediates the glutamate neurotransmitter release for trans-synaptic communication. Subsequently, the SVs are retrieved from the plasma membrane via kiss-and-run recycling or clathrin-mediated endocytosis (CME) for repeated exo/endocytosis cycles. The Drosophila NMJ is easily accessible and well-suited for both isolating and characterizing SV cycle mutants. Using forward genetic screens, novel mutations have led to the identification of new genes critical for the SV cycle3. Moreover, reverse genetic approaches starting with already known genes have led to the elucidation of new SV cycle mechanisms through the careful description of mutant cycling phenotypes4. The Drosophila NMJ is nearly ideal as an experimental synaptic preparation for dissecting SV endocytosis and exocytosis mechanisms via methods to optically track vesicle cycling during neurotransmission.
A range of fluorescent markers allow visual tracking of vesicles during cycling dynamics, but the most versatile are FM dye analogs which is first synthesized by Mao, F., et al.5. Structurally, FM dyes contain a hydrophilic head and a lipophilic tail connected through an aromatic ring, with a central region conferring spectral properties. These styryl dyes partition reversibly in membranes, do not 'flip-flop' between membrane leaflets and so are never free in the cytosol, and are far more fluorescent in membranes than water5. Reversible insertion into a lipid bilayer causes a 40-fold increase in fluorescence6. At neuronal synapses, classic FM dye labeling experiments consist of bathing the synaptic preparation with the dye during depolarizing stimulation to load dye via SV endocytosis. External dye is then washed away and the SV cycle is arrested in a calcium-free ringer solution to image loaded synapses7. A second round of stimulation in a dye-free bath triggers FM release through exocytosis, a process that can be followed by measuring the fluorescence intensity decrease. SV populations from a single vesicle to pools containing hundreds of vesicles can be quantitatively monitored6,7. FM dyes have been used to dissect activity-dependent mobilization of functionally distinct SV pools, and to compare kiss-and-run vs. CME cycling8,9. The method has been modified to separately assay evoked, spontaneous and miniature synaptic cycle activities (with highly sensitive equipment to detect very small fluorescence changes and reduce photobleaching)10. Assays can be extended to the ultrastructural level by photoconverting the fluorescent FM signal into an electron-dense label for transmission electron microscopy11,12,13,14.
Historically, bathing synaptic preparations in a high concentration of potassium (hereafter referred to as "high [K+]") has been the method of choice for depolarizing stimulation to induce SV cycling; ranging from the frog cholinergic NMJ5, to cultured rodent brain hippocampal neurons15, to the Drosophila glutamatergic NMJ model16,17. This high [K+] approach is simple, requires no specialized equipment, and is therefore accessible to most labs, but has limitations for both application and data interpretation. A much more physiologically appropriate method is to use suction electrode electrical stimulation of the nerve4,5,12. This approach drives action potential propagation for direct stimulation of the presynaptic nerve terminal, and results can be directly compared to electrophysiological assays of neurotransmission function13,14,15, but requires specialized equipment and is technically much more challenging. With the advent of optogenetics, the use of channelrhodopsin neuronal stimulation has additional advantages, including tight spatiotemporal control of channel expression using the binary Gal4/UAS system20. This approach is technically much easier than suction electrode stimulation and requires nothing more than a very cheap LED light source. Here, we employ imaging of FM1-43 (N-(3-triethylammoniumpropyl)-4-(4-(dibutylamino)styryl) pyridinium dibromide) to both compare and contrast these three different stimulation methods at the Drosophila NMJ: simple high [K+], challenging electrical and new channelrhodopsin approaches.