ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article
Updated

Electrophysiological properties of mouse and epitope-tagged human cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 expressed in HEK293 cells

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
PUBLISHED 05 Apr 2013
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background: The pore-forming subunit of the cardiac sodium channel, Nav1.5, has been previously found to be mutated in genetically determined arrhythmias. Nav1.5 associates with many proteins that regulate its function and cellular localisation. In order to identify more in situ Nav1.5 interacting proteins, genetically-modified mice with a high-affinity epitope in the sequence of Nav1.5 can be generated.
Methods: In this short study, we (1) compared the biophysical properties of the sodium current (INa) generated by the mouse Nav1.5 (mNav1.5) and human Nav1.5 (hNav1.5) constructs that were expressed in HEK293 cells, and (2) investigated the possible alterations of the biophysical properties of the human Nav1.5 construct that was modified with specific epitopes.
Results: The biophysical properties of mNav1.5 were similar to the human homolog. Addition of epitopes either up-stream of the N-terminus of hNav1.5 or in the extracellular loop between the S5 and S6 transmembrane segments of domain 1, significantly decreased the amount of INa and slightly altered its biophysical properties. Adding green fluorescent protein (GFP) to the N-terminus did not modify any of the measured biophysical properties of hNav1.5.
Conclusions: These findings have to be taken into account when planning to generate genetically-modified mouse models that harbour specific epitopes in the gene encoding mNav1.5.

Keywords

Cardiac sodium channel, Nav1.5, HEK293 cells, electrophysiology

Updated Changes from Version 1

I would like to thank Dr. Vandenberg for his comments and suggestions. We have submitted a new version of this article with a revised discussion section in which we take his suggestions into account.

To read any peer review reports and author responses for this article, follow the "read" links in the Open Peer Review table.

Introduction

The voltage-gated cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 is responsible for the initial phase of the cardiac action potential and plays a central role in cardiac impulse propagation1. Its role in human disorders has been underlined by the findings of several hundred mutations in its gene, SCN5A, that are linked to inherited cardiac electrical disorders such as congenital long QT syndrome and Brugada syndrome2. In recent years, it has been demonstrated that Nav1.5 interacts with and is regulated by different proteins (recently reviewed by Shy et al.3). Many of these interacting proteins were also found to be mutated in patients with genetically-determined cardiac arrhythmias4. The generation of genetically-modified mouse models, harbouring mutations in the Scn5a gene, has proven to be a very informative approach to investigate the various human phenotypes that are linked to the genetic variants of this gene5. Since Nav1.5 interacts with many proteins during its life cycle in cardiac cells, it would be of great interest to generate a mouse model that permits the biochemical purification of Nav1.5 with high efficiency, hence allowing the co-purification of interacting proteins. The identity of these co-purified proteins may then be determined by using mass spectrometry-based technologies. In order to do this, one needs to first generate a knock-in mouse model, where a high-affinity epitope would be added to the mouse Scn5a gene that codes for Nav1.5.

The goals of this short study were (1) to compare the biophysical properties of the sodium current (INa) generated by mouse Nav1.5 and human Nav1.5 constructs expressed in HEK293 cells, and (2) to investigate the possible alterations of the biophysical properties of human Nav1.5 constructs that were modified with specific epitopes. We used the common fluorescent GFP and YFP proteins as epitopes, which provide the advantage of being detectable without the use of antibodies. However, these tags can only be added to the N- and C-termini, which are both intracellular in Nav1.5, and which are thus, not easily accessible. Therefore, we additionally chose the FLAG-epitope (Sigma-Aldrich), which consists of a short sequence that can be inserted into the extracellular loops of Nav1.5. The results of these studies will have to be taken into account when planning the generation of a mouse line bearing an epitope-tagged Nav1.5 channel.

Methods

Transfection and culture of HEK293 cells

HEK293 cells (Robert S Kass laboratory, Columbia University, New York) were transfected by Lipofectamine LTX (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer‘s instructions. The plasmids used were the 2019 amino acid isoform of the mouse voltage-gated sodium channel (pcDNA3-mNav1.5; a gift from Thomas Zimmer, University of Jena, Germany6), human Nav1.5 (pcDNA3.1-hNav1.5), and three differently tagged hNav1.5 (pcDNA3.1-hNav1.5-GFP-N-terminal, pEYFP-hNav1.5, and pcDNA3.1-FLAG(299/300)-hNav1.5). The FLAG-tag is an eight amino acid-long epitope (DYKDDDDK) that was inserted previously (by Robert S Kass laboratory) into the extracellular loop linking the transmembrane segments S5 to S6 of domain I, between the residues Leu-299 and Val-300; GFP and YFP were previously added by T. Zimmer to the N-terminal7. For wild-type and tagged hNav1.5, 1 µg of one of the listed plasmids, 1 µg of empty pcDNA3.1 (Invitrogen), and 0.4 µg of DNA coding for CD8 (Robert S Kass laboratory) were used for transfection. In order to measure currents of comparable size, 0.01–1 µg of mNav1.5 was co-transfected with 1 µg of empty pcDNA3.1, and 0.4 µg of DNA coding for CD8. Transfected HEK293 cells were then grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) (Gibco) with 10% calf serum (Gibco), 0.2% glutamine (Sigma), and 20 mg/ml gentamycin (Gibco), and incubated at 37°C with 95%O2/5%CO2.

Cellular electrophysiology

All experiments were performed in the whole-cell voltage-clamp mode. The extracellular solution contained (in mM): 50 NaCl, 80 NMDG-Cl, 5 CsCl, 2 CaCl2, 1.2 MgCl2, 10 HEPES, 5 Glucose, adjusted to pH 7.4 with CsOH, and with an osmolality of 280–290 mOsm. The internal solution consisted of (in mM): 70 CsAsp, 60 CsCl, 1 CaCl2, 1 MgCl2, 10 HEPES; 11 Cs2EGTA, 5 Na2ATP, adjusted to pH 7.2 with CsOH, and with an osmolality of 297 mOsm. Recordings were performed at room temperature (20–22°C) using a VE-2 amplifier (Alembic Instruments, Montreal, Canada). Data was acquired by Clampex 10.2 (Axon Instruments, Union City, Canada). Membrane resistance was ≥ 1 GΩ and access resistance ≤ 6.1 MΩ. Transfected cells were recognized by the addition of 1 µl/ml Dynabeads CD8 (Invitrogen) into the extracellular solution. Current-voltage (I/V) curves` were assessed by depolarising cells from a holding potential of -100 mV to voltages of between -80 and 40 mV during 20 ms. Steady-state inactivation properties were measured by the following protocol: the cells were kept at a holding potential of -100 mV and then hyper- and depolarised during 500 ms to voltages of between -120 and 0 mV in steps of 5 mV, followed by 20 ms at the voltage that elicited the maximal response during the I/V-protocol. Voltage-dependent activation was read either from the I/V- or the steady-state inactivation-protocol. To characterise the recovery from inactivation, the cells were depolarised from a holding potential of -100 mV for 100 ms, repolarised to -100 mV at a recovery time of 0.25–3000 ms, and depolarised again for 25 ms. By varying the time of the first depolarisation step from 3 to 3000 ms followed by 25 ms of repolarisation, the onset of slow inactivation was determined (see insets of Figure 2 and Figure 4).

Data analyses and statistics

Peak values for all protocols were detected and measured by Clampfit 10.2 and I/V-relationships were fitted using KaleidaGraph 3.5 (Synergy Software, Reading, USA). Values were normalised to membrane capacitance. The following formula was used to fit I/V-curves and to calculate reversal potentials: INa = (Gmax(V-Vrev,Na))/(1+eV-V0.5/K) with INa = sodium current in pA, Gmax = max. conductance = 60 Ω-1, Vrev,Na = reversal potential = 40 mV, K = (-zδF)/FR = equilibrium constant = -5, V0.5 = voltage for 50% of maximum current = -20 mV. Activation and inactivation curves were fitted with the Boltzmann equation f0 = 1/(1+ eV-V0.5/K) with f0 = fraction of open channels/total available channels. Statistical analyses were performed using two-tailed Student's t-tests. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Electrophysiological properties of human and mouse Nav1.5 are comparable

To compare the biophysical properties of the cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 from the human (hNav1.5) or the mouse sequence (mNav1.5), we measured the electrophysiological properties of hNav1.5 and mNav1.5, transiently expressed in HEK293 cells. Representative INa recordings are shown in Figure 1. The responses to all applied protocols revealed similar characteristics for both channels, except for the reversal potential and the slope of steady-state inactivation (Figure 2 and Table 1). The peak currents from the I/V-protocol were at -15 mV for both channels (Figure 2A). Furthermore, activation and inactivation of 50% of the channels occurred for both channels at ~-28 mV and ~-71 mV, respectively. In addition, the slopes of the activation curve were comparable for both channels (6.00 mV/e-fold in human and 6.24 mV/e-fold in mouse). Significant differences could be detected in the reversal potential Vrev (51.0 mV and 56.6 mV, P<0.01) and in the slope of the inactivation curve (5.95 mV/e-fold and 6.67 mV/e-fold, P<0.01) (Figure 2B). In addition, mNav1.5 had a tendency to recover faster from inactivation (Figure 2C). The fraction of channels entering into a slow inactivation state was similar for both channel types (Figure 2D).

77ec6a9f-12ac-48fc-8e48-4ce5d0780625_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Representative INa recordings following the current voltage (I/V)-protocol described in the Methods.

(A) Voltage-dependent currents measured for hNav1.5 expressed in a HEK293 cell. (B) Data from the same protocol for mNav1.5.

77ec6a9f-12ac-48fc-8e48-4ce5d0780625_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Electrophysiological properties of human and mouse Nav1.5.

The voltage-clamp protocols used are shown in the corresponding insets. For B–D, the voltage x was adjusted to the voltage that elicited maximum current during the current voltage (I/V)-protocol (-10 to -30 mV). (A) I/V-protocol for assessment of reversal potentials. Peak currents were measured for both channels at -15 mV. Calculated reversal potentials are marked with square data points. (B) Voltage-dependence of activation and steady-state inactivation (SSI). The data was fitted with the Boltzmann formula. Only the slope of the inactivation curve differs between mouse and human sodium channels (shallower in mNav1.5). (C) Recovery from inactivation. The duration between the depolarising steps was varied from 0.25 to 3000 ms. mNav1.5 had a slight tendency to recover faster than hNav1.5. (D) Onset of slow inactivation. The duration of the first step was varied from 0.25 to 3000 ms. The relative number of channels entering slow inactivation is similar for both types. (A–B) n(hNav1.5) = 22, n(mNav1.5) = 17. (C–D) n(hNav1.5) = 9, n(mNav1.5) = 7. **P<0.01 obtained by two-tailed Student's t-tests; error bars indicate standard errors.

Table 1. Summarized properties of human and mouse Nav1.5.

Data was obtained with current voltage (I/V)- and steady-state inactivation protocols. Mean values and standard errors are shown. **P<0.01 obtained by two-tailed Student's t-tests.

hNav1.5 mNav1.5
mean ± semmean ± sem
I/V Vrev (mV)51.0 ± 0.9**56.6 ± 0.8
Activation V1/2 (mV)-27.8 ± 0.5-28.2 ± 0.7
Slope (mV/e-fold)6.00 ± 0.176.24 ± 0.16
Inactivation V1/2 (mV)-70.0 ± 1.0-71.7 ± 1.1
Slope (mV/e-fold)5.95 ± 0.12**6.67 ± 0.19
Cell capacitance pF16.0 ± 1.214.2 ± 0.7
Imax pA/pF-185 ± 21-249 ± 22
n 2217

FLAG-tag inserted at the L299/V300 site alters voltage-dependent activation of hNav1.5

The second set of experiments addressed the effects of adding epitopes to Nav1.5 on its biophysical properties. To do this, we assessed the influence of these epitopes on INa by expressing differently tagged hNav1.5 in HEK293 cells and performing whole-cell voltage-clamp experiments similar to those described above. YFP- and GFP-tags were added to the N-terminus; the FLAG-tag was inserted into the extracellular loop linking S5 to S6 of domain I, between residues Leu-299 and Val-300. Representative INa recordings for all transfected constructs are shown in Figure 3 and the data is summarised in Table 2. With the exception of the GFP-tagged construct, tagging of hNav1.5 led to a significant decrease in peak current Imax (Figure 4A) compared to the control WT hNav1.5 (FLAG: 57 pA/pF with P<0.01, YFP: 120 pA/pF with P<0.05, WT hNav1.5: 240 pA/pF). Adding GFP did not affect any of the biophysical properties of the human sodium channel, while a shallower activation slope (6.87 vs. 5.91 mV/e-fold, P<0.05, Figure 4B and Table 2) was observed for the YFP-tagged channel. The most pronounced effects were observed for the FLAG-tagged hNav1.5. The activation slope was significantly shallower (6.96 vs. 5.91 mV/e-fold, Figure 4B and Table 2), indicating that the activation of this channel is less sensitive to voltage changes. In addition, the V1/2 of activation was shifted towards more positive voltages by about 5 mV, with -23.9 mV in FLAG-hNav1.5, compared to -28.9 mV in untagged hNav1.5. Finally, the reversal potential was decreased in the FLAG-hNav1.5 (FLAG 39.3 mV and untagged 51.8 mV, Figure 4B). Recovery from inactivation (Figure 4C) and onset of slow inactivation (Figure 4D) were comparable for all channels.

77ec6a9f-12ac-48fc-8e48-4ce5d0780625_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Representative sodium current (INa) recordings.

(A) Voltage-dependent currents measured for hNav1.5 expressed in a HEK293 cell. The same data for (B) FLAG-hNav1.5 (C) YFP-hNav1.5, and (D) GFP-hNav1.5.

Table 2. Summarized properties of wild-type and tagged hNav1.5.

Data was obtained with current-voltage (I/V)-, and steady-state inactivation protocols. Mean values and standard errors are shown. *P<0.05, **P<0.01 obtained by two-tailed Student's t-tests (all statistics were calculated with untagged hNav1.5 channel as a reference).

hNav1.5 FLAG-hNav1.5 YFP-hNav1.5 GFP-hNav1.5
mean ± semmean ± semmean ± semmean ± sem
I/V Vrev (mV)51.8 ± 0.9**39.3 ± 2.249.1 ± 1.553.8 ± 1.9
Activation V1/2 (mV)-28.9 ± 0.6**-23.9 ± 0.5-27.5 ± 1.1-29.8 ± 1.1
Slope (mV/e-fold)5.91 ± 0.17**6.96 ± 0.14*6.87 ± 0.275.40 ± 0.36
Inactivation V1/2 (mV)-70.6 ± 1.2-70.0 ± 1.1-71.2 ± 1.4-68.9 ± 1.2
Slope (mV/e-fold)5.95 ± 0.245.33 ± 0.155.69 ± 0.196.37 ± 0.19
Cell capacitance pF14.4 ± 1.616.3 ± 1.114.5 ± 0.914.0 ± 0.8
Imax pA/pF240 ± 36**57 ± 11*120 ± 17214 ± 33
n 711118
77ec6a9f-12ac-48fc-8e48-4ce5d0780625_figure4.gif

Figure 4. Electrophysiological properties of untagged and tagged hNav1.5.

The voltage-clamp protocols used are shown in the corresponding insets. For B–D, the voltage x was adjusted to the voltage that elicited maximum current during the current voltage (I/V)-protocol. (A) I/V-protocol for assessment of reversal potentials. Tagging with N-terminal YFP and FLAG (L299/V300) significantly decreases peak currents. Calculated reversal potentials are marked with square data points. (B) Voltage-dependence of activation and steady-state inactivation. The data was fitted with the Boltzmann formula. The activation slope of FLAG- and YFP-tagged channels is shallower compared to the untagged hNav1.5. V1/2 is shifted by 5 mV for FLAG-hNav1.5. (C) Recovery from inactivation. The duration between the depolarising steps was varied from 0.25 to 3000 ms. No differences between the different channels could be detected. (D) Onset of slow inactivation. The duration of the first step was varied from 0.25 to 3000 ms. The relative number of channels entering slow inactivation is similar for all four channel types. (A–B): n(untagged) = 7, n(FLAG) = 11, n(YFP) = 11, n(GFP) = 8. (C): n(untagged) = 12, n(FLAG) = 5, n(YFP) = 11, n(GFP) = 8. (D): n(untagged) = 10, n(FLAG) = 8, n(YFP) = 10, n(GFP) = 8. **P<0.01 obtained by two-tailed Student's t-tests; error bars indicate standard errors.

Discussion

The present study demonstrates (1) that the biophysical properties of mouse Nav1.5 are essentially similar to the human homolog when expressed in HEK293 cells, and (2) that adding epitopes either upstream of the N-terminus of human Nav1.5 or in one of the extracellular loops reduces the amount of INa and alters some of its biophysical properties. Interestingly, GFP in the N-terminus was the only epitope that did not modify any of the measured biophysical properties of hNav1.5. The most pronounced effects could be observed by the insertion of the FLAG-tag in an extracellular loop. In this construct, not only was the amount of INa drastically decreased, but also the activation properties of the sodium channel were altered. The smaller changes found in the properties of YFP-hNav1.5 might be partially linked to the different vector used for this epitope, especially since no alterations could be observed for GFP-hNav1.5.

The limitations of studying mutant Nav1.5 channels in mammalian cells have been demonstrated in two recent studies. First, Mohler and colleagues8 observed that the Brugada syndrome causing mutant p.E1053K Nav1.5 channel did not display any trafficking defect in HEK293 cells, while it failed to traffic to the intercalated discs when expressed in rat ventricular cells. Second, the Nav1.5 p.D1275N variant, found in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and various arrhythmias and conduction disease, was also found to display reduced expression in knocked-in mouse cardiac tissue and defective expression at the lateral membrane of ventricular myocytes9. However, when expressed in chinese ovary cells, the p.D1275N variant had properties that were undistinguishable from wt channels. These observations demonstrate that, while useful to study their intrinsic biophysical properties, the mammalian cells that are used as expression systems have clear limitations when studying the trafficking properties of ion channels. Generation of genetically-modified animal models is one of the most powerful, albeit time-consuming, approaches.

However the findings of the present study have to be taken into account when planning to generate such mouse models that harbour specific epitopes in the mouse Nav1.5 gene. Different combinations of epitopes and insertion sites might reveal better candidates for in-vivo approaches. Furthermore, additional studies should be performed in HEK293 cells co-expressing other subunits and regulating proteins, and in native cardiomyocytes in order to assess the effects of added epitopes on the interactions with these proteins.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 13 Feb 2013
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Reinhard K, Rougier JS, Ogrodnik J and Abriel H. Electrophysiological properties of mouse and epitope-tagged human cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 expressed in HEK293 cells [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:48 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-48.v2)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 2
VERSION 2
PUBLISHED 05 Apr 2013
Views
15
Cite
Reviewer Report 20 Jan 2014
Céline Fiset, Faculty of Pharmacy, Centre de Recherche de l’Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada 
Approved
VIEWS 15
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Fiset C. Reviewer Report For: Electrophysiological properties of mouse and epitope-tagged human cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 expressed in HEK293 cells [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:48 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1309.r3189)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
22
Cite
Reviewer Report 20 May 2013
Jamie Vandenberg, Division of Molecular Cardiology and Biophysics, Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia 
Approved
VIEWS 22
The discussion has been appropriately modified to take into account the suggestions I made after reviewing the first version of the manuscript. The authors have not however added in any more data or analysis of the trafficking phenotypes of the ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Vandenberg J. Reviewer Report For: Electrophysiological properties of mouse and epitope-tagged human cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 expressed in HEK293 cells [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:48 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1309.r958)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 13 Feb 2013
Views
23
Cite
Reviewer Report 25 Feb 2013
Jamie Vandenberg, Division of Molecular Cardiology and Biophysics, Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 23
This manuscript from Reinhard and colleagues describes the electrophysiology of epitope tagged sodium channels expressed in mammalian cell lines. This system is commonly used for the characterizing the electrophysiological and/or trafficking phenotypes of clinically occurring mutants. Some of the constructs ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Vandenberg J. Reviewer Report For: Electrophysiological properties of mouse and epitope-tagged human cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 expressed in HEK293 cells [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:48 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1119.r798)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
15
Cite
Reviewer Report 18 Feb 2013
Céline Fiset, Faculty of Pharmacy, Centre de Recherche de l’Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada 
Approved
VIEWS 15
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Fiset C. Reviewer Report For: Electrophysiological properties of mouse and epitope-tagged human cardiac sodium channel Nav1.5 expressed in HEK293 cells [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2013, 2:48 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.1119.r777)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 13 Feb 2013
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.