Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
17:267-310
Copyright 1994 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved
NEURONAL POLARITY
Ann Marie Craig and Gar Banker
Department of Neuroscience, University of Virginia School of Medicine,
Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
KEY WORDS: axons, dendrites, protein sorting, neuronal development, nerve cell culture
THE CONCEPT OF NEURONAL POLARITY
The cell body is continuous with a variable number of processes which frequently
branch . ... These ultimately become extremely thin and disappear in the spongy
ground substance . ... These processes which, even in their ultimate, invariable
branches, must not be considered to be the source of axis cylinders or to have a
nerve fiber growing from them, will hereafter be called, for the sake of
convenience, "protoplasmic processes". [The axis cylinder,] a prominent, single
process which originates either in the body of the cell or in one of the largest
protoplasmic processes, immediately at its origin from the cell is distinguishable
from these [protoplasmic processes]. As soon as it leaves the cell, it appears at
once as a rigid, hyaline mass, much more resistant to reagents and on the whole
with a diferent reaction to them; and, from the start, it does not branch . .. .This
characteristic is not peculiar merely to the large motor cells [spinal motoneurons]
in which Remak has already parially recognized it, but also to the sensory ones,
to those of the olive, the pons, and on the whole to all which could so far be
examined; indeed, if I am not mistaken, it is also peculiar to the cells of the
cerebrum.
o Dieters (in Shepherd 199d
Some Histor
So wrote Otto Deiters 130 years ago. The terminology Deiters used sounds
archaic now-it was not until the tum of the century that the modem terms
"axon" and "dendrite" replaced the "axis cylinder" and "protoplasmic pro-
'
Early studies on the form and function of nerve cells, particularly as they regard the development
of the neuron doctrine, are the subject of a valuable new book by Gordon Shepherd (1991). This work
includes translations of key passages from many early papers, including those mentioned here.
267
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
Quick links to online content
Further
ANNUAL
REVIEWS
268 CRAIG & BANKER
cesses" of Deiters' day. But Deiters' description, and the remarkably beautiful
lithographs that accompany it, formulated the modem view of the morphology
of neurons.
An appreciation of the significance of these morphological features required
another thirty years and a spokesman with the insight and authority of Cajal:
"The transmission of the nervous impulse is always from the dendritic
branches and the cell body to the axon or functional process. Every neuron,
then, possesses a receptor apparatus, the body and the dendritic prolongations,
an apparatus of emission, the axon, and an apparatus of distribution, the
terminal arborization of the nerve fiber" (Cajal 1989). This proposition,
referred to as the Law of Dynamic Polarization, formed the basis for analysis
of the circuits underlying brain function for the next 75 years.
The Law of Dynamic Polarization is, of course, incorrect. Since the
discovery of dendro-dendritic synapses by Ral l , Shepherd, Reese & Brightman
( 1966) , it has become clear that neurons participate in a much more varied
repertoire of synaptic interactions than Cajal and his contemporaries envi
sioned. Thus from a physiological standpoint it is incorrect to view neurons
as having an overall polarity, with dendrites that conduct information toward
the soma and axons away.
But are axons and dendrites fundamentally different, apart from the
ambiguities of their physiological polarity? In the past decade, evidence from
two lines of investigation has indicated that they are, and has returned the
concept of neuronal polarity to fashion. The first line of investigation, marked
by the publication of Matus et al ( 1981) , was the immunocytochemical
demonstration of dramatic and unexpected molecular differences between the
axonal and dendritic cytoskeleton. One reason for the impact of these studies
is that the differences they revealed between axons and dendrites seemed
unambiguous-black and white, or in some cases, red and green-far more
concrete and compelling than the differences in shape and structure revealed
by microscopy. Moreover, molecular specialization of the axonal and dendritic
cytoskeletons bore no obvious relationship to other structural specializations,
such as synapses or nodes of Ranvier. Rather this specialization seemed to
reveal an inherent difference between axons and dendrites as a whole.
The second of these developments was the demonstration that many of the
morphological and molecular distinctions between axons and dendrites are
reproduced when neurons develop processes in culture. Since this is our area
of expertise, it merits a section of its own.
A Little Culture
Many experiments during the past decade have demonstrated that when
embryonic neurons are dissociated and placed into culture, they develop a
single axon and several dendrites that can be readily distinguished based on
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
NEURONAL POLARITY 269
their morphology (Neale et al 1 978, Kriegstein & Dichter 1 983, Bartlett &
Banker 1984a) . Because of the advantages of cell culture for cell biological
studies-advantages such as accessibility, control of the environment, and the
ability to visualize living cells-cell culture has become the method of choice
for many studies of neuronal polarity. Two culture systems have been
particularly well characterized from this point of view, one derived from the
embryonic rat hippocampus (Goslin & Banker 1 991 ) , the other from embry
onic or neonatal rat sympathetic ganglia (Peng et al 1 986, Higgins et al 1 991 ) .
Both types of culture are relatively homogeneous. Under appropriate condi
tions, sympathetic cultures contain exclusively principal neurons and are free
from contamination by ganglionic interneurons and nonneuronal cells. Our
best estimates suggest that about 90% of the neurons in hippocampal cultures
are pyramidal cells; the rest are intereurons of several types (Benson et al
1992, Craig et al 1993) . Few nonneuronal cells are present. Cells from both
sources can be maintained for a month or more in culture, enough time for
the cells to become quite mature and to allay fears that the cells are terminally
ill from the outset. In situ both of these cell types engage primarily in classical
synaptic relationships; in culture their axons are consistently presynaptic and
their dendrites postsynaptic (Bartlett & Banker 1984b, Furshpan et al 1 986) .
In both cultures, axons and dendrites display their distinctive and characteristic
morphologies, and the cells appropriately compartmentalize a variety of
marker proteins. For example, Figure 1 shows the complementary distribution
of MAP2 to dendrites and GAP-43 to axons of cultured rat hippocampal
neurons . This polarized phenotype is equally characteristic of neurons that
develop in low-density cultures and do not have an opportunity to contact
other cells o form synapses (Bartlett & Banker 1 984a, Caceres et al 1 984) .
Such observations indicate that, from a cell biological point of view, neurons
exhibit a fundamental polarity, independent of physiological considerations
concering information flow, and suggest that this organization may be largely
govered by an endogenous program of development.
Several additional culture models are available for studies of neuronal
polarity, including cultures derived from embryonic rat mesencephalon
(Autillo-Touati et al 1 988, Lafont et al 1 992) and cerebellum (Ferreira &
Caceres 1 989, Caceres & Kosik 1990) . The neuronal populations in these
cultures have not been fully characterized, and the extent to which they
develop a mature, fully polarized phenotype remains uncertain. Nevertheless,
they have already provided novel insights into mechanisms that control the
development of neuronal polarity (see below) . Retinal photoreceptors, al
though hardly typical neurons , have also proved valuable for studies of polarity
(Adler 1 986). Given the diversity of neuronal form and function (see below),
the development and characterization of additional culture models suitable for
studies of neuronal polarity would be welcome.
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
270 CRAIG & BANKER
a
Figure 1 Complementary localization of MAP2 (b) and GAP43 (e) in a rat hippocampal neuron
after eight days ill culture, MAP2 immunoreactivity is present only in the cell body and the five
dendrites. whereas GAP43 immunoreactivity is absent from the dendrites but present in the
numerous axons traversing the field. (From Goslin et al 1988. with permission),
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
NEURONAL POLARITY 271
We are firmly convinced of the validity of studying neuronal polarity in
culture-all of our own research hinges on this assumption-but we emphasize
that there is no guarantee that neurons will become polarized in culture, even
if they exhibit a well-polarized phenotype in situ. For example, under some
culture conditions sympathetic neurons fail to develop dendrites and distribute
normally dendritic markers to their axons, even though the cells survive for
many months (Higgins et al 1 988) . Thus in attempting to characterize the
polarity of cultured neurons it is critically important to be certain that markers,
morphology, and synaptic polarity give a consistent picture.
Suitable continuous nerve cell lines would provide a particularly valuable
complement to the use of primary cultures for studies of polarity. Cell lines
can be used to obtain large quantities of genetically homogeneous cells, which
would facilitate biochemical studies of neuronal polarity, and they can also
be used to prepare stably transfected lines that overexpress normal proteins
or that express mutant proteins. Unfortunately, most commonly used neural
cell lines apparently are not polarized. For example, PC1 2 cells make an
extensive fiber network when exposed to nerve-growth factor (NGF) , but they
do not form synapses or become polarized (Greene et al 1 991 ) . It is unclear
whether their neurites represent axons, dendrites, or a hybrid that expresses
some features of each. A neuroblastoma-glioma hybrid cell line, which does
not ordinarily make synapses, can be induced to form presynaptic specializa
tions through overexpression of synapsin lIb, but even under these circum
stances it is not obvious that individual neurites display a consistent synaptic
polarity (Han et al 1 991 ) .
Recently Pleasure et al ( 1 992) described a promising method for obtaining
a relatively pure population of neuronal cells from a human embryocarcinoma
cell line and showed that some cells develop two types of processes that
resemble axons and dendrites, as judged by their content of cytoskeletal
antigens. The method involves prolonged treatment of the parent cell line
(N-Tera 2/Dl cells) with retinoic acid, which causes many of the cells to
acquire a neuronal phenotype. These cells are then dislodged mechanically
and replated onto a substrate appropriate for studies of neuronal growth and
morphological differentiation.
By using novel approaches , including retrovirus-mediated cell immortaliza
tion or cell hybridization, researchers are now generating new neural cell
lines . It may prove worthwhile to screen some of these lines by using the
standard immunological markers of neuronal polarity. For example, the
morphology of MAH cells , a v-myc-immortalized line of sympathoadrenal
progenitor cells that acquire many of the features of sympathetic neurons when
exposed to fiboblast growth factor (FGF) and NGF, suggests that they might
develop both axons and dendrites following differentiation by FGF and NGF
(Birren & Anderson 1 990) .
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
272 CRAIG & BANKER
The Size and Shape of Things
Although neurons obviously have a highly extended and complex shape
compared with other types of cells and have axons that can attain great length,
actual measurements of the absolute size of axonal and dendritic arbors are
difficult to obtain. Table 1 provides estimates of the volume and surface area
of the axonal and dendritic arbors of two types of neurons, based on published
measurements of their dendritic arbors and estimates of their axonal size.
Spinal motoneurons are representative of projection neurons, and granule
neurons from the dentate gyrus are typical short-axon cells. These data make
clear just how large neurons can become-the size of most nonneuronal cells
is about that of a neuron' s cell body-and illustrate the remarkable extent of
variation among different neuronal types . This is true not just in absolute
terms, but also in the relative size of their dendritic versus axonal arbors. The
somatodendritic domain accounts for only 8% of the surface area of the
motoneuron, but is more than 80% of the surface area of a dentate granule
cell. It was surprising to find that the somatodendritic domain can account
Table 1 Neuronal dimensions
Spinal Dentate
motoneuronsa granule cellsb
Surface Area (x 103 /m2)
Cell body 8.4 0.4
Dendrites 550 12
Axon 7,100 2.5
Total 7,700 15
Soma:Dendrites:Axon 1:65:845 1:28:6
SomaiDendrites:Axon 1:13 5:1
Volume (x 103 /m3)
Soma 72 0.8
Dendrites 414 4. 4
Axon 17,700 0.13
Total 18,200 5. 3
Soma:Dendrites:Axon 1:6:245 6:34:1
SomaiDendrites:Axon 1:35 40:1
'Cat lumbosacral a-motoneurons (Cullheim et al 1 987: R Burke, personal
communication), These cells have on average 11.7 dendrites. whose combined
total length is 107 mm. Their axons were assumed to be 225 mm long and 10 fm
in diameter.
b Rat dentate gyrus granule cells (Desmond & Levy 1 982, 1 984, and personal
communication; Claibore et al 1986), These cells have on average 2.2 dendrites,
whose combined total length is 3,7 mm. Their axons were assumed 10 be 4 mm in
lotal length (including collaterals) and 0.2 fm in diameter. The contribution of
dendritic spines and axonal varicosities is not included. This could affect these
estimates by as much as two-fold.
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
NEURONAL POLARITY 273
for so large a proportion of cell surface and volume, because most discussions
of neuronal geometry focus on the extreme length and volume of the axon.
Axons and dendrites difer in caliber at their origin, and the differences in
caliber are amplified during branching. At dendritic branch points, total
cross-sectional area is conserved or, most frequently, decreases slightly
following the so-called 3/2' s power rule (p312 = D 2 + D;2, where P and D
represent the diameters of parent and daughter branches, respectively).
2
These
branch power relationships are conserved among neurons with dendritic
branching patters as diverse as Purkinje cells, motoneurons, cerebellar
granule cells, and cultured hippocampal neurons (Hillman 1 979, Banker &
Waxman 1 988) . Assuming that dendritic branches must attain some minimum
diameter for structural stability (typically 0. 5-1. 0 !m), the diameter of each
stem dendrite as it emerges from the cell body limits both the number of
branches it can give rise to and, because dendrites usually branch at regular
intervals, its total length. The decrease in diameter at branch points explains
why dendrites resemble trees and how they got their name (dendron is tree,
in Greek) . Although the branching of individual axons has not been analyzed
in detail , as that of dendrites has, the total cross-sectional area of axons clearly
can increase with branching. For example, as motoneuron axons ramify to
innervate different muscle fibers, their total cross-sectional area increases by
a factor of 1. 25-1 . 5 at each branch point (Zenker & Hohberg 1973, Pfeiffer
& Friede 1985) . Cullheim & Kellerth ( 1 978) illustrate a motoneuron collateral
in the spinal cord that 'is 2 !m in diameter and gives rise to 39 branches whose
average diameter is 0. 73 !m (a 1 4-fold increase in total cross-sectional area).
Finally, axonal diameter can also increase independent of branching. The
diameter of a motoneuron axon doubles between the initial segment and the
axon proper (Cullheim & Kellerth 1978). Dendrites and axons also typically
differ in branching angles (Hillman 1 979, Lasek 1 988). These differences in
caliber and branching presumably refect important, but as yet unknown,
differences i n the properties of their cytoskeletal elements.
The Facts
Table 2 lists some of the constituents reported to be differentially distributed
in neurons . Complementary studies in situ and in culture provide the best
confirmation for the distribution of a given protein. Data from studies in situ
2
In reality, the exponent in the branch power equation varies among different classes of neurons
between 3/2 and 2. If the 3/2' s power ratio holds for a particular cell, the summed cross-sectional area
of both daughter branches is about 80% that of the parent, whereas the summed circumference
(proportional to membrane area) increases by about 1 26%. If the exponent in the branch power
equation is 2, the summed cross-sectional area of the daughters is the same as the parent, and summed
circumference increases about 141 %.
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
274 CRAIG & BANKER
Table 2 Compartmentation in neurons
Organelles:
ribosomes and protein
synthetic machinery
mRNAs
endoplasmic reticulum
Golgi complex
synaptic vesicles
early endosomes
late endosomes
mitochondria
Cytoskeletal proteins:
MAPla (MAPI)
MAPl b (MAP5)
MAP2
MAP 3/4
Localization and basis
(I: in situ; 2: in culture)
somatodendritic
most restricted to soma; selected
mRNAs are somatodendritic
throughout
soma and proximal dendrites
predominantly axonal
(presynaptic)
throughout
soma and proximal dendrites
throughout
throughout
throughout; phosphorylated in
axons but not dendrites
somatodendritic
axonal
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
2
2
1,2
References
Peters et al 1991, Bartlett & Banker
1984a,b
Steward & Banker 1992
Villa et al 1992, Satoh et al 1990,
Walton et a1 1992
Stieber et al 1987, Croul et al 1990,
Peters et al 1991
De Camilli et al 1983, Navone et al
1986, Fletcher et al 1991
Parton et a1 1992
Parton et al 1992
Peters et a1 1991, Bartlett & Banker
1984a
Huber & Matus 1984, Berhardt et al
1985
1,2 Sato-Yoshitake et al 1989, Riederer
et al 1990, Mansfield et al 1991
1,2 Berhardt & Matus 1984, Caceres et
al 1984
Huber et al 1985, Berhardt et al
1985
tau axonal (or differentially 1,2 Binder et al 1985, Dotti et al 1987,
Kosik & Finch 1987 phosphorylated); not well
segregated in culture
kinesin throughout 2 Ferreira et al 1992
RII subunit of cAMP kinase somatodendritic (binds to MAP2) Vallee et al 1981, De Camilli et al
1986
neurofilament subunits throughout; highly phosphory- 1,2
lated in axons but not dendrites
Sterberger & Sterberger 1983, Lee
et al 1987, Lein & Higgins 1989
Membrane proteins:
Na+, K+ -ATPase (al and a3 throughout
subunits)
glycine receptors
GABAA receptors
glutamate receptors
gluRI-4; mGluRla
somatodendritic (postsynaptic)
somatodendritic (postsynaptic)
somatodendritic (postsynaptic)
I ,2 Pietrini et al 1992
Triller et al 1985, Seitandou et al
1988
1,2 Somogyi et al 1989, Killisch et al
1991, Craig & Banker,
unpublished observations
1,2 Rogers et al 1991, Petralia & Went
hold 1992, Martin et al 1992,
1993, Craig et al 1993
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
Table 2 (continued
Na channels
a subunit, Type I and III
a subunit, Type II
K channels
A-type, Kvl.4
A-type, Kv4.2
delayed rectifier (drk 1)
transferrin receptor
L1
N-CAM 180
integrin, a8 subunit
Thy-l (GPI-linked)
TAG-I (GPI-linked)
F3/FIl!contactin
(GPI-linked)
GAP-43 (lipid-linked)
neurogranin (RC-3;
lipid-linked?)
Localization and basis
(I: in situ; 2: in culture)
somatodendritic
axonal
axonal
somatodendritic
somatodendritic (clustered)
somatodendritic
axonal
somatodendritic (postsynaptic)
axonal
conflicting reports
axonal
axonal in some neurons,
throughout in others
axonal
somatodendritic
NEURONAL POLARITY 275
I
2
1,2
1,2
References
Westenbroek et al 1989, 1992b
Westenbroek et al 1989, 1992b
Sheng et al 1992
Sheng et al 1992
Trimmer 1991
Cameron et al 1991
Persohn & Schachner 1987, 1990;
Esch & Banker, unpublished
observations
Persohn & Schachner 1990
Bossy et al 1991
Morris et al 1985, Xue et al 1990,
Dotti et al 1991
Furley et al 1990, Yamamoto et al
1990
Faivre-Sarrailh et al 1992
1,2 Van Lookeren Campagne et al 1990,
Goslin et al 1988, 1990
Represa et al 1990, Watson et al
1992
obviously set the standard because they refer to "real" neurons, but studies
in cell culture have proved to be a useful, sometimes essential complement.
Cell culture allows direct visualization of large portions of individual cells,
whereas it is sometimes difficult to construct an accurate view of a protein's
localization from the incomplete picture available from a single tissue section.
In addition, cell culture often enables the researcher to examine the distribution
of constituents as intercellular interactions are manipulated. Finally, antibodies
can be applied to living cells so that only extracellular antigens are accessible.
Thus light microscopy of cell cultures is sometimes sufficient to draw
inferences-for instance, whether a given receptor is pre- or postsynaptic or
a given receptor epitope is intra- or extracellular-that would be difficult to
draw from studies of tissue sections, even with electron microscopy.
Several conclusions are apparent from this compilation of diferentially
distributed neuronal constituents. First and most obvious is that many of the
proteins that are most important in neuronal function have a highly specific
localization. This observation is hardly novel, but it emphasizes once again
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
276 CRAIG & BANKER
the importance of understanding how neuronal constituents come to be
diferentially distributed.
A surprisingly large proportion of membrane proteins apparently have a
polarized distribution. This could be coincidental, because the catalog of
protein distributions is far from complete, but it could also be related to the
mechanisms that gover the sorting of membrane proteins. In other types of
polarized cells, most proteins are segregated in one domain or the other. It is
also striking that different members of the same family often have different
distributions. This is particularly obvious in the case of the voltage-gated Na +
and K+ channels, and it applies to calcium channels as well (Westenbroek et
al 1 992a) . One reason for the remarkable diversity of channel types may be
to allow channels with diferent functional characteristics to be targeted to
different cellular domains and microdomains .
Synaptic constituents, including synaptic vesicle proteins and postsynaptic
glutamate receptors, polarize to axonal or somatodendritic domains in
uninnervated cultured hippocampal neurons and subsequently cluster upon
innervation (Fletcher et al 1 991 , Craig et al 1 993). This has led to the
suggestion that the localization of synaptic constituents involves two distinct
mechanisms: an endogenously programmed targeting either to axons or cell
bodies and dendrites, followed by a clustering at synaptic sites that depends
on cell-cell interactions. A similar two-step model might apply to the
localization of proteins at other microdomains, such as nodes of Ranvier.
With regard to the cytoskeleton, polarity is reflected not in the partitioning
of the basic constituents-both axons and dendrites are built on a central core
that contains microtubules and neurofilaments surrounded by an actin-rich
cortex-but rather in the organization of microtubules, the differential
distribution of some cytoskeleton-associated proteins, and local differences in
phosphorylation. Microtubules in the axon are all oriented plus-end distal,
whereas dendrites contain microtubules of both polarity orientations (Baas et
al 1 988, Burton 1 988). The high molecular weight form of the microtubule
associated protein MAP2 is present in the somatodendritic domain but is absent
from axons. On the other hand, neurofilaments are present in both dendrites
and axons (although their abundance varies), but their highly phosphorylated
forms are restricted to axons. In some cases (e. g. tau and MAP 3/4) it is not
yet clear if the diferential immunoreactivity of axons and dendrites reflects
the distribution of the protein itself or that of a specific posttranslational
modification (Papasozomenos & Binder 1 987) .
The distribution of intracellular organelles presents a somewhat more
complicated picture. Some organelles, such as late endosomes and the Golgi
complex, extend only into proximal dendrites, indicating a partial partitioning
between soma and dendrites. Others, such as ribosomes, are present through
out the somatoJendritic domain but excluded from the axons, consistent with
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
NEURONAL POLARITY 277
the conventional view of neuronal polarity. But an analysis of individual
mRNAs suggests an underlying complexity. Many mRNAs are confined to
the cell body, whereas some are present throughout the dendritic tree (Steward
& Banker 1992) . Still other organelles, such as mitochondria and endoplasmic
reticulum, are present throughout the cell, but even here complications may
emerge. A differential distribution of mitochondria has been observed in some
circumstances ( Hevner & Wong-Riley 1991), presumably reflecting the
metabolic demands of different portions of the neuron.
Several important classes of molecules are conspicuously absent or un
derrepresented in the data summarized in Table 2. For example, different
extracellular matrix (ECM) molecules exert profoundly different effects on
axonal versus dendritic growth, yet virtually nothing is known about the
distribution of the integrins and other potential receptors likely to mediate
these effects. Likewise, surprisingly few systematic studies of the distribution
of cell adhesion molecules have been carried out, especially in culture, where
the axonal or dendritic distribution of cell adhesion molecules might be more
obvious. Given the important role of these molecules in neuronal development
generally, and the specific possibility that a differential distribution of
adhesion molecules could account for the differential growth that marks the
emergence of neuronal polarity, this constitutes an important gap in our
knowledge.
Also missing from Table 2 are the proteins that make up the spectrin-based
submembranous cytoskeleton. Neurons express multiple forms of spectrin,
ankyrin, and a band 4. 1 homologue (Riederer et al 1986, Zagon et al 1986,
Bennett et al 1991), together with other, novel proteins thought to associate
with the submembranous cytoskeleton (Hayes et al 1991, Shirao et al 1992) .
Many of these constituents are differentially expressed in different types of
neurons and are differentially distributed within these neurons. For example,
ankyrinRo is restricted to cell bodies and dendrites, whereas a diferent
isoform, ankyrinR' is highly concentrated at nodes of Ranvier (Kordeli &
Bennett 1991), The available data are somewhat difficult to interpret in the
context of neuronal polarity, but based on observations in other cell types
there is every reason to suspect that these proteins play an important role in
the establishment and maintenance of neuronal polarity (see below),
All the Facts
Just as the Law of Dynamic Polarization is an oversimplification, so "the
facts" just presented paint a distorted picture. In order to make a case for the
concept of neuronal polarity, researchers have focused almost entirely on types
of neurons that fit the classical view. Perhaps it is now safe to admit that this
concept is oversimplified and to begin to come to grips with the diversity of
the neuronal phenotype. Some neurons, such as the granule cells of the
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
278 CRAIG & BANKER
olfactory bulb, lack axons (Shepherd 1 979) . Some classes of amacrine cells
have as many as six axons that arise from different dendrites (Famiglietti
1 992) . Still others , including certain classes of horizontal and amacrine celis,
have shapes so unusual that it is uncertain if the terms axons and dendrites
apply at all (Fisher & Boycott 1 974, Bloomfield & Miller 1 986) . It should
be instructive to examine some of these unusual cells with accepted markers
of polarity.
Cells such as these are sufficiently rare that they might be regarded as
curiosities, but neurons whose axons and dendrites are simultaneously pre
and postsynaptic are not uncommon (Shepherd 1 979) . Thus the cellular
mechanisms that in hippocampal neurons ensure that synaptic vesicles and
postsynaptic receptors are selectively segregated to axonal and dendritic
domains must permit the same constituents to assume a different distribution
in other types of nerve cells.
And what of invertebrate neurons? In the nerve nets of coelenterates,
neurons are apparently unpolarized. Cells give rise to two or three apparently
identical neurites, which can conduct impulses both toward and away from
the cell body and which form bidirectional, chemical synapses where they
contact other cells (Bullock & Horridge 1 965 , Anderson 1 985) . In higher
invertebrates a typical cell gives rise to a single process that has the properties
of an axon, and this process gives off groups of dendritic branches that arborize
within the neuropil and are postsynaptic (Bullock & Horridge 1965 , Cohen
1970; also see illustrations in Young 1 989) . In some cases, clusters of dendritic
branches are given off in different ganglia (Kennedy & Mellon 1 964) . Such
neurons exhibit a clear localization of function, which presumably must be
reflected in a differential distribution of membrane receptors and channels,
but the organization of their axonal and dendritic domains i s sufficiently
different from that in vertebrate neurons to suggest that the details of molecular
sorting may also difer.
THE CELLULAR BASIS OF NEURONAL POLARITY
We must admit from the outset that, in a factual sense, we know almost
nothing about the cellular mechanisms responsible for compartmentation in
neurons. If we confined ourselves to the facts, this discussion would be quite
short. But even from the little we know, it is possible to make reasonable
conjectures about the mechanisms that might account for the polarity of
membrane proteins . Although the segregation of intracellular organelles,
cytoskeletal proteins, and RNA is undoubtedly of equal importance, we know
much less about their cellular bases.
We propose that the segregation of membrane proteins involves the
following steps (Figure 2): (a) the sorting of axonal and dendritic proteins
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
1. SORTING AND VESICLE FORMATION
-in the TGN?
-receplor-mediated?
-lipid-mediated?
-different classes of vesicles?
-default pathwaY
?
2. TRANSPORT
-microtubule-based?
-dependent on microtubule polarity?
-directed by domain-specific motors?
NEURONAL POLARITY 279
3. PLASMA MEMBRANE ADDITION
-at specific sites?
-at different sites than final localization?
-mediated by docking proteins?
Involves domain-specific rabs?
4. ANCHORING
-to cytoskeleon via ankyrlns, spectrlns ... ?
-limits diffusion between domains?
-generates microdomalns?
-other barriers to diffusion?
Figure 2 Proposed targeting mechanisms for axonal and somatodendritic membrane proteins.
The neuron illustrated has three dendrites and a single axon, which emerges from the base of the
cell body. Axonal proteins are represented by open squares, and somatodendritic proteins by
closed triangles.
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
280 CRAIG & BANKER
into distinct carrier vesicles, (b) directed transport to the appropriate domain,
(c) insertion into the membrane at specific sites, and (d anchoring t o limit
diffusion within the membrane. Local protein synthesis, localized post
translational modification, and domain-specific degradation may also contrib
ute. Some of these mechanisms are likely to contribute to the polarized
distribution of other neuronal constituents as well .
Much of the current discussion concering the targeting of membrane
proteins in neurons derives from possible analogies with polarized epithelial
cel l s, whose sorting mechanisms are better understood. Thus before discussing
mechanisms in detail, we will examine the parallels between polarity in
neurons and polarity in epithelial cells.
Are Neurons Just Long, Skinny Epithelial Cells?
Epithelial cells form sheets that line the gastrointestinal tract and the luminal
surfaces of organs such as the kidneys, liver, and lungs. The epithelial cell
surface is divided by a circumferential band of tight junctions into two
functionally and molecularly distinct domains: the basolateral domain, which
is in contact with the basement membrane and adjacent epithelial cells, and the
apical domain, which faces the lumen. The idea that neurons and epithelial cells
may share common mechanisms for segregating cellular constituents was first
explicitly proposed by Dotti & Simons ( 1 990) , who infected cultured
hippocampal neurons with viruses and examined the targeting of viral
glycoproteins. This method had been used with great success to elucidate the
mechanisms of protein sorting in epithelial cells. Glycoproteins encoded by the
viral DNA are routed through the ER and Golgi complex of infected cells,
presumably by normal cellular mechanisms, and are inserted into the apical or
basolateral plasma membrane, where they direct the budding of the nucleocap
sid from the cell surface. In Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cells, a
polarized epithelial cell line, the vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) G protein, is
delivered to the basolateral surface, whereas the influenza fowl plague virus
(FPV) hemagglutinin (HA) is delivered apically (Rodriguez-Boulan & Penderg
ast 1 980) . Dotti & Simons ( 1 990) found that VSV G protein was preferentially
targeted to the somatodendritic domain of infected hippocampal neurons, and
FPV HA to the axonal domai n. These results, taken in the context of the
then-current model of epithelial polarity (Simons & Wandinger-Ness 1 990) , led
to the proposal that the axonal and somatodendritic domains of neurons
correspond respectively to the apical and basolateral domains of epithelial cell s,
and that the mechanisms for targeting membrane proteins t o the corresponding
domains may be similar in the two cell types.
One simple means to evaluate this hypothesis is to compare the distribution
of membrane proteins in epithelial cells and in neurons. Few proteins ae
endogenous to both cell types, so such comparisons usually require the
introduction of exogenous proteins, either through viral infection or through
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
NEURONAL POLARITY 281
DNA transfection. Table 3 compares the distribution of membrane proteins
whose localizations have been determined in both hippocampal neurons and
MDCK cells. In suppor of the neuron/epithelial hypothesis, Dotti et al (1991)
reported that endogenously expressed Thy-l is preferentially distributed to the
axons of cultured hippocampal neurons; it
h
as an apical distribution when
expressed in MDCK cells (Powell et al 1 99I b) . Although the distribution of
several other proteins is consistent with the epithelial/neuronal hypothesis,
apparent contradictions have also come to light. For example, three proteins
that have a polarized distribution in MDCK cells-the I 1 and I3 subunits of
Na
+
,K
+
-ATPase and CD-8, a lymphocyte cell surface protein-are not
obviously polarized in hippocampal neurons. A second possible exception is
Thy- I . Although Dotti et al ( 1 991 ) reported that Thy-l is present only in
axons, other workers have detected this protein in both dendrites and axons
of hippocampal neurons and other types of neurons in situ (Morris et al 1985,
Xue et al 1 990).
Table 3 Comparison of the distribution of membrane proteins in hippocampal
neurons and MOCK cells
Localization Localization
Protein in neurons' in MOCK cells'
FPV-HA axonal
b
(I) apical< (I)
GAB A transporter axonal
d
(E) apical
d
(I)
Ty-! axonale; uniform
f
(E) apicalg (I)
VSV-G somatodendritic
b
(I) basolateral
b
(I)
N-CAM 1 80 somatodendritic
h
(E) basolateral
i
(I)
transferrin receptor somatodendritic
i
(E) basolateral
k
(E)
GABAA receptor, al somatodendritic
1
(E) basolateral m (I)
SFV E protein somatodendriticn (I) basolateralO (I)
Na
+
K
+
ATPase, a! not polarizedP (E) basolateralq (E)
Na
+
K
+
ATPase, a3 not polarizedP (E) basolateral' (I)
CO-8 not polarized' (I) apical' (I)
(E), endogenous; (I), introduced by transfection or viral infection.
b Dotti & Simons (1990).
C Rodriguez-Boulan & Pendergast (1980).
d Pietrini et al (1993) .
Dotti et al ( 1991).
f Xue et al (1990).
g Powell et al (l 99Ib).
h Persohn & Schachner (1990).
;
Powell et al (1991a).
j Cameron et a1 (1991).
k Fuller & Simons (1986).
'
Killisch et a1 (1991).
mPerez-Velasquez & Angelides (1993).
"Dotti et al (1993).
DRoman & Garoff (1986).
P Pietrini et al (1992).
qCaplan et al (1986).
, A. M. Craig, R. Wyborski, D. Gottlieb & G. Banker, unpublished research.
, Migliaccio et a1 1990.
Parallel
yes
yes
?
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
A
n
n
u
.
R
e
v
.
N
e
u
r
o
s
c
i
.
1
9
9
4
.
1
7
:
2
6
7
-
3
1
0
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
f
r
o
m
w
w
w
.
a
n
n
u
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
.
o
r
g
b
y
S
i
m
o
n
F
r
a
s
e
r
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
n
0
4
/
0
9
/
1
3
.
F
o
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
u
s
e
o
n
l
y
.
282 CRAIG & BANKER
Recent studies of epithelial cells that indicate a diversity of protein
distribution among different cell types are also difficult to reconcile with the
epithelial/neuronal hypothesis as originally proposed. For example, Na
+
K
+