Increased spine density in the NAc after withdrawal from repeated cocaine exposure has been reported by multiple groups (see
Introduction). Relatively little is known about functional aspects of the additional spines, although morphological and electrophysiological results obtained after non-contingent cocaine exposure suggest that they may form functional synapses
[9],
[17]. In the present study, we photo-released glutamate near MSN spines and monitored both NMDAR-mediated Ca
2+ entry and electrical responses in the soma. Based on our prior report of increased spine density after a nearly identical cocaine self-administration regimen and withdrawal time
[8], we assume that spine density was increased in our Coc-SA group. If there was a corresponding increase in synapses in the Coc-SA group, and the new synapses contained NMDARs, then we should have observed larger NMDAR-evoked currents in the Coc-SA group compared to the Sal-SA group. In fact, whole cell currents did not differ between groups, suggesting that increased spine density in the Coc-SA group is not accompanied by an increase in synaptic NMDARs on processes. More surprisingly, whereas nearly all spines in the Sal-SA group responded to glutamate uncaging with NMDAR-mediated Ca
2+ entry, we found a significantly smaller percentage of responding spines in the Coc-SA group. We interpret these results to indicate that a greater proportion of spines in the Coc-SA group lack functional NMDARs. A potential alternative explanation is suggested by a prior study showing decreased NMDAR-mediated Ca
2+ transients in spines with stronger diffusional coupling to the dendrite
[38]. However, our results revealed non-responsive spines, rather than less responsive spines, in the cocaine group, and are therefore more consistent with a lack of NMDARs than with an alteration in Ca
2+ handling. While it would be of interest to determine the morphological features of the spines exhibiting different Ca
2+ responses, the two dimensional images obtained with Ca
2+ imaging do not accurately reflect the morphology of the entire spine in three dimensions. Thus, determining the morphological features of the spines exhibiting different Ca
2+ responses requires other approaches and will be addressed in future studies.
It should be noted that we are not specifically activating NMDARs located within spine heads, but rather photoreleasing glutamate over a region of neuropil. Therefore, the possibility exists that dendritic NMDARs are generating a Ca
2+ signal that could diffuse into spines, contributing to our results. However, while it is certainly the case that Ca
2+ from dendritic compartments can invade spine heads through passive diffusion, this diffusion is typically modeled from spine to dendrite, with initial faster decay kinetics in the spine than in the neighboring dendrite
[39]. In addition, the spine neck provides a significant barrier to diffusion in either direction, although the extent of the barrier depends upon the spine classification
[40],
[41].
Biochemical studies of Coc-SA and Sal-SA groups (prepared identically to those used for Ca
2+ imaging and electrophysiology) found no significant differences in NMDAR subunit protein levels in NAc PSD fractions, although the Coc-SA group showed trends towards decreased NMDAR subunit levels. These results are in general agreement with our electrophysiological results showing no significant changes in NMDAR-mediated currents. Both findings are consistent with the idea that an increase in dendritic spine number (and perhaps synapses; see
[9],
[17]) is not necessarily accompanied by an increase in NMDAR expression. A caveat regarding our biochemical results is that cocaine increases spine density in specific portions of the dendritic arbor
[2],
[8], whereas our PSD fraction is prepared from the whole NAc and may therefore be inadequate for detecting spatially restricted changes related to increased spine density. Another consideration is that electrophysiological studies sampled NAc neurons in the core subregion, whereas our PSD fraction was prepared from the whole NAc in order to obtain an adequate yield of protein from each rat.
We have shown that CP-AMPARs, which normally account for ~5% of the evoked ESPC in the adult rat NAc, accumulate at excitatory synapses in the NAc of Coc-SA rats (using a regimen identical to the present one) and account for ~30% of the evoked EPSC on WD42–47
[22]. This is a functionally significant neuroadaptation because CP-AMPARs have different properties than Ca
2+-impermeable AMPARs, including a larger single channel conductance
[42], and of course contribute to Ca
2+ signaling, e.g.,
[43]. If CP-AMPARs are added to spines lacking NMDARs, then CP-AMPARs rather than NMDARs would serve as the source of glutamate-induced Ca
2+ entry. This predicts an inversion of the induction requirements for LTP, since NMDA receptors are activated at depolarized potentials whereas CP-AMPARs are blocked at depolarized potentials by intracellular polyamines, see
[44],
[45]. Unfortunately, it will be difficult to determine if CP-AMPARs are present in the spines that lack NMDARs as concurrent imaging of NMDAR and AMPAR currents is not reliably feasible within individual spine heads. Moreover, significant challenges exist for detecting and imaging within individual spines the small channel conductance (10–20 pS) of the CP-AMPARs
[46], not all of which is attributable to Ca
2+. A much larger Ca
2+ conductance is carried through NMDAR channels,>60pS;
[47]. Nevertheless, it is intriguing to note that synapses containing CP-AMPARs tend to exhibit low NMDAR currents
[44],
[45],
[48].
The NAc receives glutamate afferents from several regions, including the prefrontal cortex, basolateral amygdala, ventral subiculum, and thalamus, and inputs from these regions may converge on a single MSN, e.g.,
[11],
[49]–
[52]. If new cocaine-induced spines with an abnormal complement of ionotropic glutamate receptors are preferentially innervated by a particular set of afferent fibers, this could alter the balance of information flow into the NAc in a manner that promotes cue-induced cocaine seeking.
An alternative hypothesis is that the non-responding spines in the Coc-SA group not only lack NMDARs, but also lack AMPARs and thus do not participate in functional excitatory transmission. According to this hypothesis, CP-AMPARs would be added to existing spines, either at synapses that already possess Ca
2+-impermeable AMPARs or perhaps at silent synapses (which contain only NMDARs). Interestingly, the number of silent synapses in the NAc increases with non-contingent cocaine exposure but then normalizes during withdrawal, perhaps due to AMPAR addition
[53]. It is possible that a similar sequence occurs during withdrawal from extended access cocaine self-administration. Supporting the idea that CP-AMPARs are added to synapses that already contain NMDARs, there is evidence that NMDARs are present at synapses prior to the addition of AMPARs during normal development and during the unsilencing of silent synapses
[54],
[55]. On the other hand, there is no reason to assume that cocaine-induced spine plasticity recapitulates normal development or normal plasticity. Furthermore, there is precedent for “AMPAR-only” synapses on neurons that express NMDARs
[56].
Non-contingent cocaine exposure can produce different plasticity in NAc MSN expressing D1 versus D2 dopamine receptors
[9],
[12],
[57], although this is not always the case, e.g.,
[58],
[59]. In the incubation model, no evidence for heterogeneous responding exists – in fact, all of the adaptations in excitatory transmission that we have observed to date (CP-AMPAR accumulation, switch in group I mGluR function, altered CB1R tone;
[23],
[27],
[35]) appear to occur in most MSN. This lack of heterogeneity may be because these adaptations appear only after a month or more of withdrawal
[28], and therefore are quite temporally removed from the initial effects of cocaine on D1 and D2 receptor expressing subpopulations. Based on these findings, it seems unlikely that the NMDAR plasticity described here is specific to a particular MSN subpopulation, although this should be tested in the future. Related to this issue, it is important to note that segregation of D1 and D2 receptors in MSN of the NAc is incomplete, that there are other anatomical distinctions that contribute importantly to MSN diversity, and that DA receptor subtypes other than D1 and D2 contribute to dopamine transmission
[60].
In conclusion, our study is the first to explore functional aspects of cocaine-induced plasticity at the level of individual dendritic spines in the NAc. Our results demonstrate a dramatic restructuring of NMDAR-mediated Ca2+ signaling in some NAc spines after prolonged withdrawal from extended access cocaine self-administration. While several possible interpretations of our data exist, we suggest that withdrawal from this cocaine regimen is accompanied by the emergence of a population of NMDAR-lacking spines. It will be important for future studies to examine the connectivity and AMPAR complement of these spines, particularly in light of withdrawal dependent increases in synaptic CP-AMPAR levels.