Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Glutamate is the major excitatory neurotransmitter in the mammalian central nervous system that guides developmental and experience-dependent changes in many cellular substrates and brain circuits, through the process collectively referred to as neurobehavioral plasticity. Regulation of cell surface expression and membrane trafficking of glutamate receptors represents an important mechanism that assures optimal excitatory transmission, and at the same time, also allows for fine-tuning neuronal responses to glutamate. On the other hand, there is growing evidence implicating dysregulated glutamate receptor trafficking in the pathophysiology of several neuropsychiatric disorders. This review provides up-to-date information on the molecular determinants regulating trafficking and surface expression of metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptors in the rodent and human brain and discusses the role of mGluR trafficking in maladaptive synaptic plasticity produced by addictive drugs. As substantial evidence links glutamatergic dysfunction to the progression and the severity of drug addiction, advances in our understanding of mGluR trafficking may provide opportunities for the development of novel pharmacotherapies of addiction and other neuropsychiatric disorders.

Keywords

Metabotropic glutamate receptor mGlu receptor trafficking synaptic plasticity addiction

INTRODUCTION

Glutamate is the main excitatory neurotransmitter in the brain, playing a crucial role in many processes, including fast and slow excitatory neurotransmission, control of basal neuronal activity, and synaptic plasticity [1–3]. On the other hand, dysregulation of glutamatergic neurotransmission can lead to acute cellular distress or to long-term maladaptive plasticity, believed to be associated with many neuropsychiatric disorders [4–8]. Consequently, it is not surprising that glutamatergic transmission in the brain is tightly regulated. As the synaptic effects of glutamate are mediated by its receptors, regulation of glutamate receptor function and/or receptor membrane availability represents a mechanism that allows for both precise and fast regulation of neuronal excitability, synaptic strength, and activity of neural circuits. The effects of glutamate as a neurotransmitter are mediated by the two main types of receptors, called ionotropic (iGlu) and metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptors (for review, see: [9]). Over the past few decades, a number of cellular mechanisms that alter the function or membrane availability of iGluR, which encompass the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA), kainate (KA), and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, have been described. These mechanisms include receptor desensitization, multimerization, post-translational modifications, and membrane trafficking [10–13]. The molecular mechanism of membrane receptor tra-fficking is known to be essential for the onset and maintenance of AMPA- or NMDA-dependent synaptic plasticity [14, 15], and its dysregulation has been associated with a spectrum of learning deficits [16, 17], cognitive impairment [18], and motivational pathologies (escalation of drug seeking, or persistent drug taking [19]). In comparison, much less is known about the membrane trafficking of mGluRs. mGluRs are G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR) that are characterized both by the slower onset of their effects and prolonged control over synaptic activity [20, 21]. All eight known mGluR subtypes are coupled to either a Gαq or Gαi heterotrimeric G-protein, which (together with Gβ γ subunits) are responsible for the majority of mGluR-mediated cellular effects [22].

mGluRs are divided into three main families, based on the type of G-protein/second messenger signaling, sequence similarities, and pharmacology. Group I mGluRs (mGlu1 and mGlu5) are coupled Gαq/₁₁ proteins, which consequently activate the β isoform of phospholipase C (PLCβ), resulting in hydrolysis of phosphoinositide, generating inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate (IP3) and diacylglycerol. This is a canonical Gαq-protein signaling pathway that leads to mobilization of intracellular calcium and activation of protein kinase C (PKC; for review, see: [1]). Gr-oup II (mGlu2 and mGlu3) and group III (mGlu4, mGlu6, mGlu7, and mGlu8) mGluRs couple to Gαi/o proteins, activation of which leads to inhibition of adenylyl cyclase [23]. Additionally, Gβ γ subunits of the G-protein contribute to the regulation of ion channels and other downstream signaling partners [24]. It should be noted that both groups I and group II/III receptors can also modulate G-protein ind-ependent signaling pathways [25, 26], adding additional complexity to mGluR-dependent regulation of cellular signaling and synaptic plasticity. Emerging evidence suggests that these non-canonical signaling pathways can also provide feedback regulation of mGluR function through post-translational modification and trafficking [27–31]. While the dysregulation of mGluRs has been linked to a variety of neurological and psychiatric disorders, the role of mGluR membrane trafficking in these disorders remains poorly understood. In comparison, to this date, iGluR trafficking has been a subject of 2000+ published reports, while mGluR trafficking was studied or discussed in only 50+ studies (source: PubMed, December 2020), with only a single review focusing on mGlu trafficking mechanisms [32].

The current review aims to address this knowledge gap by (Section ‘Cellular mechanisms regulating mGlu receptor trafficking’) providing an up-to-date overview of the cellular mechanisms governing mGluR membrane trafficking and function, (Section ‘mGluR trafficking in the human brain’) addressing the evidence on mGluR trafficking in the human brain, and (Section ‘The role of mGlu trafficking in drug-induced neurobehavioral plasticity’) discussing the impact of said mechanisms within the context of maladaptive syn-aptic plasticity, produced by addictive drugs. The authors of this review propose that a better under-standing of the mechanisms regulating mGluR trafficking could lead to the development of ‘tools’ to fine-tune receptor function and availability and even to develop novel treatments of substance use disorder and neuropsychiatric disorders in general.

CELLULAR MECHANISMS REGULATING mGlu RECEPTOR TRAFFICKING

Receptor trafficking describes the movement of receptors between the membrane and different cel-lular compartments including the movement of rec-eptors into axons or dendrites and their targeting to the pre- and post-synaptic membrane compartme-nts. Receptor trafficking is also used to describe both the internalization (endocytosis) of the receptors and their subsequent intracellular re-location, as well as the return (recycling) of the internalized receptors to the plasma membrane [33]. A prototypical stimulus known to initiate receptor trafficking is prolonged receptor stimulation by the receptor agonist, and this mechanism also applies to mGluRs [34]. Additionally, at least some mGluRs are subject to agonist-independent (constitutive) internalization [35]. In either case, the step-by-step process of rec-eptor internalization, as well as the fate of the internalized receptors, depends on the identity of interacting partner proteins [36]. In the next section of this review, we introduce mGluR-interacting proteins that display the ability to alter receptor trafficking and discuss both the molecular determinants and the functional outcome of individual interactions.

a. mGluR-interacting proteins that regulate receptor trafficking

GRK/arrestins/clathrin

A common mechanism directing agonist-induced internalization of GPCRs involves interaction with G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), followed by binding of arrestins and clathrin-mediated endocytosis. Several lines of evidence suggest that mGluRs also undergo agonist/GRK-mediated internalization [37, 38]. During this process, GRKs first bind the consensus sequence in the distal C-ter-minal of mGluRs [39], phosphorylates residues in the proximity of its binding site; with additional phosphorylation sites possibly located at the memb-rane-proximal portion of the C-terminal tail [40], and within one of the receptor intracellular loops [41]. GRK binding and phosphorylation initiates interaction with arrestins, which physically uncouple receptors from its G proteins [42], followed by internalization of the receptor via clathrin-assisted endocytic machinery. After internalization, the receptors are either dephosphorylated by phosphatases and recycled back to the cell surface, or targeted to lysosomes and degraded [37]. Members of GRK2 (GRK2 and GRK3) and GRK4 (GRK4, GRK5, and GRK6) families are expressed in the brain [43], where they regulate mGluR function and internalization through the canonical phosphorylation-dependent (but also phosphorylation-independent) pathway. With respect to mGluRs, GRK2-mediated internalization has been the most studied. GRK2 binds and internalizes mGlu1 and mGlu5 [44–46], while having no direct effect on mGlu4 internalization [47]. Interestingly, the mechanism of GRK2-mediated internalization of mGlu5 differs based on the brain region. In cortical neurons that express high levels of GRK2, GRK2-mediated mGlu5 internalization is agonist- and phosphorylation-dependent, while in the striatal neurons, internalization is agonist- and phosphorylation-independent [45]. The proposed mechanism for this non-canonical GRK2-assisted mGlu5 internalization requires a specific RGS homology domain for GRK2 [46]. Unlike GRK2, GRK4 has been shown to promote only phospho-rylation-dependent internalization of group I mGluRs [39, 48]. The next step in GRK-mediated internalization is the binding of arrestin to mGluR. Arrestin protein family consists of arrestin-1, arrestin-2 (β-arrestin-1), arrestin-3 (β-arrestin-2), and arrestin-4. Only arrestin-2 and -3 (known as nonvisual arrestin subtypes) connect to clathrin [49] and are thus in-volved in clathrin-dependent endocytosis [50]. They convey both protein-adaptor and signal-transduction function, participating in the activation and scaffolding of signaling complexes inside the cell [51]. Their interaction with the receptor regulates both the activity in mGluR-dependent signaling pathways [52–57], as well as the trafficking of mGluRs [39, 58–60]. The majority of studies on arrestin-dependent mGluR regulation focused on mGlu1/5 receptors, with only a few investigating the GRK-mediated mGlu7 trafficking [53, 60, 61].

Arrestin serves as an adaptor for clathrin [49], which assembles into the clathrin lattice, accompanied by membrane vesiculation, creating clathrin-coated pits, and finally pinching off and transporting the vesicle into the cell [62, 63]. With agonist-induced GPCR endocytosis being predominantly clathrin-mediated, it has been proposed that this is also the primary mechanism responsible for mGluR internalization [64–67]. The fate of mGluRs after endocytosis remains incompletely understood. [68] reported that during ligand-induced internalization of mGlu1, the receptor is trafficked through the endosomal compartments and recycled back into the membrane, with only a small fraction found in lysosomes. This suggests that endocytosis and recycling might play a significant role in various forms of mGluR-dependent neurobehavioral plasticity (at least for some mGluR subtypes). It should be noted that mGluRs can also be internalized via a clathrin-independent mechanism that involves interactions of caveolin within lipid rafts [69], or via other mechanisms mediated by various mGluR-specific adaptor proteins (as described below).

Calcium/calmodulin/PKC

Calmodulin (CaM) is a ubiquitous calcium-sen-sing molecule that interacts with a large number of proteins and modulates their activity/function in a calcium-dependent manner [70]. Recent evidence suggests that CaM also plays a role in constitutive surface expression and internalization of mGlu1/5 receptors. CaM directly binds the intracellular (C-terminal) region of these receptors, though the bin-ding sequences and functional consequences of binding are distinct for mGlu1 vs. 5 [71, 72]. For mGlu5, the functional consequence of this interaction is increased receptor surface expression, possibly via its in-membrane stabilization [72]. On the other hand, protein kinase C (PKC)-mediated phosphorylation of S901 within the mGlu5 CaM-binding sequences prevents CaM binding and reduces mGlu5 surface expression [72, 73]. Since the stimulation of mGlu5 itself leads to increased activity of PKC, PKC-mediated phosphorylation and mGlu5 internalization likely represent a homeostatic mechanism ‘scaling down’ mGlu5 responses to prolonged agonist stimulation. Indeed, stimulation of mutant mGlu5 that cannot be phosphorylated by PKC does not lead to receptor internalization and produces a more sustai-ned pattern of receptor signaling (Ca²⁺ oscillations) compared to a wild-type mGlu5 [72]. Similarly, preventing the translocation of activated PKC (ɛ subtype) to the membrane reduces agonist-induced mGlu5 internalization in striatal slices [74]. While these data support the idea that mGlu5 function and surface expression is controlled through the balance between Ca²⁺/CaM and PKC activity, there are other possible mechanisms by which Ca²⁺/CaM can regulate trafficking of mGluRs. For example, subtle sequence differences between mGlu1 and mGlu5 result in distinct CaM binding sites, and the resulting effect is a different ability of CaM to regulate mGluR trafficking. Hence the mutation of the CaM binding site in the mGlu1 sequence increases (not decreases) receptor surface expression [75]. Another mechanism by which Ca²⁺/CaM can regulate surface expression of mGlu1/5 is dependent on the interaction of Ca²⁺/CaM-dependent kinase type II (CaMKII) with these receptors [29, 76, 77]. While studies agree that CaMKII binds mGlu5 at a specific motif in the distal C-terminal receptor domain to alter downstream receptor signaling, the outcome of mGlu5-CaMKII interaction on the receptor surface expression remains controversial (increased vs. decreased endocytosis). Besides group I mGluRs (mGlu1/5), CaM also binds several group III mGluRs [78–80]. Though the antagonistic regulation of mGlu4 trafficking by CaM and PKC has not been thoroughly investigated, CaM does bind mGlu4, while PKC activation promotes mGlu4 internalization [81]. Nakajima et al. [78] were first to demonstrate that CaM binds the C-terminal region of mGlu7 and that phosphorylation of the CaM-binding domain can inhibit this interaction. Later it was shown that PKC-mediated phosphorylation and displacement of CaM does not promote internalization (as with mGlu5), but rather promotes binding of PKC-adaptor protein termed PICK1 (or Protein Interacting with C Kinase –1), which stabilizes mGlu7 surface expression [82, 83]. Activity-dependent internalization of mGlu7 is then mediated by dephosphorylation of the receptor [84].

Protein phosphatases

Protein phosphatases play a critical role in regulating the process of mGluR recycling. A study by Mahato et al. [28] showed that reinsertion of mGlu5 back to the membrane is disrupted if the activity of protein phosphatase (PP) 2A and 2B is blocked. While mGlu5 recycling is completely dependent on PP2A, only a partial effect has been shown by blocking PP2B. It remains to be determined why is the recycling of select mGlu5s in the brain sensitive to PP2B-mediated dephosphorylation, while other mGlu5 populations are PP2B-insensitive [85]. Further, PP2C dephosphorylates sequences within the mGlu3 C-terminal tail, which can affect desensitization, internalization, or recycling of the receptor [86]. mGlu7 was also found to be affected by dephosphorylation of its C-terminal tail, but in this case, by PP1 isoform. The PP1 and agonist-mediated dephosphorylation of mGlu7 regulate its trafficking by reducing surface expression of the receptor [84]. Other binding areas for PP1C were also found for mGlu1a, 5a, 5b, and 7b splice variants of mGlu receptors [87], although more research is needed to determine if these interactions occur in vivo and whether they have any effect on the trafficking of these receptors.

Small GTPases

Rab GTPases are one of the largest groups of the Ras-related small GTPases, known to play a significant role in vesicle transport of the cell [88], and are also widely involved in the regulation of GPCR trafficking [89–91]. These small proteins recruit other effector proteins to the surface of membranes and co-regulate the vesicular transport through guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEF) and GTPase-activating protein (GAP) cascades [92]. While it is well documented that these small GTPases are involved in membrane trafficking of GPCRs in general, little is known about their activity that is related to mGluR trafficking. As shown by Eseeltine et al. [93], Rab8 interacts with mGlu1a reducing the rate of receptor endocytosis. Interestingly, surface expression of mGlu1b is not regulated by Rab8, possibly due to the lack of Rab8-binding domain in its slightly shorter C-terminal region (vs. mGlu1a; [93]). Another protein from the family of small GTPases that binds mGluRs is Ral. This GTPase was found to be colocalized with the group I mGluRs in endocytic vesicles (in both non-neuronal cell lines and neurons) and acts to promote constitutive endocytosis of the group I mGluRs [94]. However, Ral levels increase after prolonged agonist-induced activation of mGluRs, suggesting that Ral co-regulates activity-dependent changes in mGluR internalization, likely as a part of a larger membrane-associated protein complex [94]. Another GTPase linked to mGluR trafficking is ARF6. This GTPase drives the constitutive internalization of mGlu7 in non-neuronal cell lines, but mediates agonist-induced internalization in hippocampal neurons [61]. Endocytosis of mGlu7 receptors through ARF-6 activation is clathrin-independent, unlike NMDA receptor endocytosis.

Homer proteins

Homer proteins represent a family of adaptor proteins enriched in the postsynaptic density that serve as scaffolds for the group I mGluR receptors, as well as crosslinkers to a number of other associated postsynaptic density proteins (for review see: [95]). By binding and recruiting different proteins to the proximity of mGlu1/5, Homer proteins help to orchestrate complex cellular signaling and alter cell surface expression of mGluRs. One of the most prominent effects of Homer proteins is altered kinetics and amplitude of the intracellular Ca²⁺ osc-illations upon mGlu1/5 activation. Studies utilizing truncated mGlu1/5 variants and peptide-masking ap-proaches identified that Homer proteins bind to a proline-rich motif (PPxxF) in the distal portion of the mGlu1/5 C-terminal [96]. In addition to the three main Homer isoforms (Homer1/2/3), a number of splice variants have been identified to date. In general, Homer splice variants can be classified into two categories, as close to full size (‘long’) and truncated (‘short’) species. For example, splicing of Homer1 gives rise to a short form (Homer1a) and two long forms (Homer1b and Homer1c), Homer2 has two long variants (Homer2a and Homer2b) and two short variants (Homer2c and Homer2d), and Homer3 with two long (Homer3a and Homer3b) and two short variants (Homer3c and Homer3d) [95]. Critically, some Homer splice variants display activity-dependent expression patterns and, therefore, the ability to regulate mGluRs function and subcellular location in a dynamic fashion. The best-characterized activity-regulated splice variant is Homer1a, which mimics an expression pattern of immediate early genes [97]. This short Homer splice variant retains the ability to bind mGlu1/5 (through its N-terminal EVH1 domain) but lacks the C-terminal coiled-coil domain necessary for dimerization and additional scaffold organization. As all Homer proteins bind to the common sequence in the mGlu1/5 receptor, a rapid increase in Homer1a results in a binding competition with other homer proteins. This has been described as a ‘dominant-negative’ effect of Homer 1a that leads to the uncoupling of mGlu1/5 receptors from its scaffold and to dynamic changes in receptor subcellular distribution and function [96, 98]. And while the effects of long vs. short Homer isoforms on membrane dynamics of mGlu1/5 vary across different cell lines, a detailed study of Homer effects on mGlu1/5 subcellular location in neurons revealed a common pattern, with long Homers promoting synaptic membrane clustering of mGlu1/5 [99]. On the other hand, Homer1a produced a relatively diffuse distribution of the receptors in the plasma membrane [99]. Though, overexpression of the Homer1b variant can promote intracellular (endoplasmic reticulum) retention under certain conditions [100]. This is significant, as altered mGlu1/5 surface availability and synaptic function that results from dysregulated short vs. long Homer protein expression have been implicated in various neuropathologies, including the Angelman syndrome [101], age-related memory impairment [102], fragile X syndrome [103] and apoptosis [104]. Altered mGlu5-Homer interactions and impaired mGlu5-dependent synaptic plasticity have also been observed after acute stress [105], and brief or prolonged exposure to cocaine [106, 107], or alcohol [108] – see Section ‘The role of mGlu trafficking in drug-induced neurobehavioral plasticity’ for more information.

Caveolin

Another protein implicated in the regulation of agonist-induced internalization of mGluRs is caveolin. Caveolin belongs to a family of receptor scaffold proteins involved in the endocytosis through creating characteristic caveolae (‘little caves’ or small invaginations in the plasma membrane), aiding with proper membrane targeting, vesicular processes, and signal transduction of a variety of membrane proteins (for review see: [109]). Caveolin was found to interact with mGluRs most likely through the motifs in the transmembrane or intracellular domain of the receptor, and mutations within these motifs reduce receptor surface expression, as shown for mGlu1 [110]. There is also evidence of co-localization of caveolin with mGlu5, with both mGlu1 and mGlu5 shown to be internalized by caveolin-dependent endocytosis [69, 111]. Caveolin likely co-regulates mGlu1/5-dependent synaptic plasticity, as caveolin-1 knockout mice display the loss of mGlu1/5-dependent long-term depression (LTD) in the hippocampus [112].

Tamalin

Tamalin is another scaffold protein that interacts with the group I mGluRs. It binds to the PDZ-binding motif of mGluRs, and its C-terminal part binds to other proteins, such as GEFs [113]. In the brain, tamalin is prominently expressed in the olfactory bulb, cerebral cortex, hippocampus, anterior olfactory nucleus, olfactory tubercle, striatum, and nucleus accumbens [113]. In vitro cell-based assays showed that in the absence of mGluRs, tamalin self-assembles into autoinhibited conformations that are disrupted by the expression of mGluRs, after which tamalin preferentially interacts with the receptor. Tamalin may also facilitate dimerization (or even multimerization) of group I mGluRs [114, 115] and their interaction with GEF proteins [113]. The functional significance of these bimodal tamalin interactions has been demonstrated by Kitano et al. [113]. In this study, overexpression of wild-type or mutant tamalin (lacking the GEF binding domain) in non-neuronal and neuronal cell lines resulted in increased and decreased cell-surface expression of mGlu1a, respectively [113]. However, more recent evidence suggests that knockdown of endogenous tamalin in mouse hippocampal neurons prevents ligand-dependent internalization of mGlu1 and mGlu5 [116].

Spinophilin

Spinophilin is a multifunctional scaffolding protein highly enriched in dendritic spines across most brain regions and essential for ‘normal’ synaptic communication [117]. Spinophilin has been shown to interact with mGlu1 and 5 through directly binding specific sequences within the C-terminal tail and the second intracellular loop (IL2) of these receptors [118]. The consequence of this interaction is the decreased rate of mGlu1/5 endocytosis and altered intracellular signaling. Specifically, genetic deletion of spinophilin enhanced mGlu5 endocytosis, increased activity of downstream signaling (ERK1/2 and Akt), and modified Ca²⁺ responses in primary cortical neurons. Spinophilin is also an important co-regulator of mGlu1/5 synaptic plasticity, as mGlu5-dependent LTD was lost in hippocampal slices from spinophilin null mice [118]. It is very likely that mGlu5-spinophilin interaction involves other proteins (such as SAPAP3) that participate in orchestrating mGlu1/5 membrane delivery, signaling and synaptic function. Interestingly, spinophilin knockout mice also display reduced amphetamine and cocaine locomotor sensitization [119, 120], an effect possibly rooted in disrupted interaction between mGlu5 and D2 receptor signaling in the striatum [120].

Norbin

Norbin (also known as Neurochondrin) is a neuron-specific protein widely expressed in the brain, though also found in the peripheral nervous system [121]. Norbin co-localizes and interacts with two specific sequences in the membrane-proximal portion of the mGlu5 C-terminal [122]. Overexpression of norbin in non-neuronal cell lines promoted downstream receptor signaling, augmenting the frequency and the duration of mGluR5-elicited calcium oscillations. Further, constitutive deletion of norbin gene reduced surface expression of mGlu5 and produced schizophrenia-like neurobehavioral plasticity in norbin knockout mice [122]. Interestingly, a reduction of norbin expression and norbin-mGlu5 interaction has been detected in the postmortem analysis of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex tissue from schizophrenic patients [123, 124], suggesting its role in the psychopathology of this disorder.

Sorting nexins and related proteins

Heterocomplexes containing sorting nexin 27 (SNX27) protein, vacuolar protein sorting-associated protein 26A (VPS26), and mGlu5 have been identified in the dorsal horn spinal cord neurons and implicated in pain regulation in rats [125]. SNX27 is a member of the large sorting nexin family of cytoplasmic and membrane-associated proteins implicated in endocytosis and protein trafficking. [125] found that interaction between mGlu5 and SNX27-VPS26 facilitates mGlu5 membrane trafficking, and this process is important for behavioral allodynia induced in models of neuropathic injury. Another sorting nexin, SNX1, regulates the endosomal sorting of several surface receptors, including mGlu1. SNX1 is crucial for recycling mGlu1 back to the surface membrane (receptor re-sensitization), and its function positively correlates with the amount of surface mGlu1. Additionally, this interaction is mediated by hepatocyte growth factor-regulated tyrosine kinase substrate (or Hgs; [126]), a protein previously implicated in vesicular trafficking [127].

b. Post-translational modifications regulating mGluR trafficking

mGluRs are subject to multiple types of post-translational modifications that exert diverse effects on the receptor function. As discussed in the section above, phosphorylation of the specific mGluR residues represents one of the key factors controlling receptor trafficking and subcellular distribution. A number of functional phosphorylation sites have been identified in the sequence of mGlu receptors, where phosphorylation and dephosphorylation can result in changes in receptor function or cellular localization [37, 128]. Specifically, surface expression of group I mGluRs was found to be regulated through phosphorylation by PKC [27, 39, 72, 74, 93, 129], ERK [56], protein kinase II [76], and GRKs [130], with the latter implicated specifically in the regulation of mGlu5 function [40]. Fyn kinase is a member of the Src family kinases (SFKs). It is a nonreceptor tyrosine kinase enriched in the striatum that could be activated by dopaminergic agents. There is a complex interplay between D2 receptor activation, Fyn activity, and mGlu5 synaptic recruitment, suggesting that dopamine-glutamate interactions can be mediated in part by changes in phosphorylation and trafficking of mGlu5s [131]. Group II mGluRs are also subject to kinase-specific regulation of trafficking [86]. For group III mGluRs, modification by (de)phosphorylation has been shown to regulate mGlu7 trafficking. PKC-mediated phosphorylation increased mGlu7 surface stability [78], while agonist and PP1-mediated dephosphorylation had the opposite effect [84].

Besides phosphorylation, other types of post-translational modifications regulate mGluR cellular trafficking. For example, SUMOylation, a process of linking Small Ubiquitin-like MOdifiers to the lysine residues of target proteins, represents a reversible protein modification regulating the nuclear transport, chromatin organization, stress response, and other cellular processes (for review see: [132, 133]). With regards to mGluRs, it has been shown that SUMOylation leads to the stabilization of mGlu7 on the cell surface, while deSUMOylation decreases its surface expression [134]. However, phosphorylation of mGlu7 and its further interaction with other proteins plays an important role in endocytosis, as the deSUMOylation itself does not directly internalize the receptor [134].

Ubiquitination is the cellular process in which proteins are tagged by ubiquitin, a 76 amino acid protein. Besides marking proteins for proteosome degradation, the addition of the ubiquitin tag also regulates the internalization of several plasma membrane proteins. It has been shown that blocking of the ubiquitination of mGlu1 reduces the agonist-induced internalization of the receptor. And further, as the ubiquitination process is reversible, it seems to participate in the recycling of mGlu1 receptors [135]. Ubiquitination may also play an important role in the internalization of the mGlu5, as the receptor phosphorylation by PKC promotes binding of an E3 ubiquitin ligase (Siah-1A), resulting in changes in trafficking and degradation in lysosomes. Mono-ubiquitination of mGlu5 targets this receptor to enter the late endosomal pathway [136, 137].

Despite limited evidence, post-translational modification of mGluRs likely plays a role in the pathophysiology of neuropsychiatric disorders. As a detailed overview of this topic is beyond the scope of this review, the interested reader is referred to a recent review by Mao et al. [138] that focuses on the significance of mGluR post-translational modifications within the context of drug abuse and addiction.

c. mGluR trafficking between intracellular compartments

In addition to the conventional understanding of neurotransmitter receptor trafficking that encompasses receptor plasma membrane delivery, withdrawal, and recycling, some evidence suggests that functional mGluR are being targeted to intracellular membranes and compartments. One specific example of such intracellular membrane trafficking is the targeting of functional mGlu5 receptors to the inner nuclear membrane. This membrane might represent a significant destination for neuronal mGlu5 receptors, with some evidence suggesting that up to 80% of all cellular mGlu5s are intracellular, with about 60% embedded in the inner nuclear membrane [139]. A specific sequence within the receptor C-terminal domain is responsible for the targeting of mGlu5 receptors to the inner nuclear membrane [140]. Activation of nuclear mGlu5, similarly to the receptors expressed on the cell surface, can evoke oscillatory Ca²⁺ responses [141]. However, activation of intracellular mGlu5 in neurons evokes a higher and more sustained rise of Ca²⁺, when compared to the plasma membrane receptors. Due to this atypical Ca²⁺ signature, activation of intracellular mGlu5 (at least in the striatal and hippocampal neurons) induces a unique pattern of intracellular signaling and immediate early gene expression [142–144]. Consequently, mGlu5 targeted to the nuclear-membrane can participate in unique forms of synaptic plasticity [145]. These findings suggest that intracellular or nuclear membrane-residing mGluR receptors need to be considered and evaluated in future studies to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the role of mGluRs in neurobehavioral plasticity and neurological disorders in general.

mGluR TRAFFICKING IN THE HUMAN BRAIN

Information on cellular mechanisms and regulation of mGluR trafficking have almost exclusively originated from studies in neuronal/non-neuronal cell lines or through the analysis of the animal brain tissue. Whether such trafficking mechanisms exist in the human brain is unclear. In this section, we discuss available evidence indicating altered cell surface availability of mGluRs in the human brain under physiological and pathophysiological conditions. The relevant studies can be divided into two broad categories; first, the findings of altered expression of mGluR-accessory proteins in the postmortem human brain tissue, and second, evidence stemming from ex vivo autoradiography or in vivo PET studies with mGluR-specific radioligands. Supporting evidence from gene-association studies is also included.

A study by Matosin et al. [146] documented increased expression of dimerized mGlu5 receptor and mGlu5-accessory proteins known to regulate its membrane trafficking (norbin, tamalin, and Preso1, see Section ‘Cellular mechanisms regulating mGlu receptor trafficking’ for more information) in the CA1 hippocampal region of patients with schizophrenia (regardless of the prior antipsychotic treatment). This indicates that dysregulated mGlu5 surface trafficking and membrane anchoring may exist in schizophrenia [147]. Next, Meyers et al. [148] conducted an analysis of genetic variants within the set of genes coding for components of mGluR cell signaling and chronic alcohol use in a large sample of urban and minority participants. This study uncovered that GRM1 (mGlu1), GRM5 (mGlu5), EEF2 (eukaryotic translation elongation factor 2), mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin), and HOMER2 gene variants predicted excessive alcohol use behavior, indicating that dysregulation of mGlu1/5 membrane targeting and signaling cascades is a feature in alcohol used disorder. And finally, a postmortem brain tissue analysis conducted in a small sample of subjects with PTSD diagnosis revealed an increase in Shank1 expression in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) [149]. Shank1 is a scaffold protein highly enriched in the postsynaptic density that is part of a broader mGlu5 scaffold and plays a role in mGlu5 membrane anchoring and edocytosis [174]. The same study (though examining a different patient sample) uncovered higher mGlu5 availability in PTSD patients and a positive correlation between avoidance behavior and mGlu5 availability across the subregions of the prefrontal cortex [149]. As in vivo mGlu5 availability was assessed using a PET radioligand [¹⁸F]FPEB, a mGlu5 negative allosteric modulator, increased PET signal might indicate higher mGlu5 cell surface availability (which is in agreement with increased Shank1 expression), rather than increased glutamatergic tone at this receptor [150]. A similar PET-based approach was utilized to assess the availability of mGlu5 receptors in abstinent subjects with a history of cocaine dependence or chronic nicotine use [151, 152]. Both studies revealed a dynamic pattern changes in mGlu5 availability across several cortical and subcortical brain regions that depended on the length of abstinence, providing indirect evidence that changes in mGlu5 signal correspond to altered receptor surface availability rather than changes in gene or protein expression (for more details see the Section ‘The role of mGlu trafficking in drug-induced neurobehavioral plasticity’). In order to answer the question of in vivo mGluR cell surface availability, future studies need to adopt a more comprehensive approach that allows distinguishing between desensitized versus internalized receptors in living human subjects [153].

THE ROLE OF mGluR TRAFFICKING IN DRUG-INDUCED NEUROBEHAVIORAL PLASTICITY

Dysregulation of mGlu function is believed to underlie (or accompany) a wide spectrum of neurological and neuropsychiatric conditions, including depression, schizophrenia, fragile X syndrome, Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s and Parkinson’s disease, stress-related disorders, and in relevance to the topic of the current review –drug addiction/substance use disorder [154–156]. While for many of these conditions, the direct evidence of altered mGluR trafficking is limited, common findings of disrupted mGluR-dependent synaptic plasticity or signaling indicate that altered surface availability of mGluRs could be a contributing factor. This section reviews a variety of findings on dysregulated mGluR trafficking reported after a brief or prolonged exposure to abused drugs and discusses how this mechanism contributes to the emergence and persistence of drug-induced neurobehavioral plasticity.

The first study that documented changes in mGluR surface expression induced by abused drugs was the finding of reduced mGlu5 surface expression in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) 24 hours after a single cocaine administration (20 mg/kg i.p., [106]). Increased local expression of Homer1b/c that caused intracellular retention of mGlu5 was put forward as the possible cellular mechanism responsible for the loss of surface mGlu5. This is in agreement with the previous reports of increased internalization and/or endoplasmic reticulum retention of mGlu1/5 receptors by long Homer variants in non-neuronal and neuronal cell lines [97, 99, 100]. Further, the reduction in mGlu5 surface population in the NAc coincided with the loss of endocannabinoid- and mGlu5-dependent LTD in this brain region. This suggests that even a single non-contingent administration of cocaine is sufficient to induce a relatively long-lasting change in accumbal plasticity that is linked to Homer-mediated changes in mGlu5 trafficking. A later study by Mitrano et al. [157] compared the effects of acute and chronic cocaine administration (15–30 mg/kg i.p.) on the subcellular and subsynaptic localization of mGlu1 and mGlu5 in the core and shell of the NAc. Interestingly, in this study, both the single and repeated cocaine administration reduced the population of dendritic plasma membrane-bound mGlu1a in the NAc shell, while no changes in the localization of mGlu5 were observed. While this finding seemingly contradicts the previous study by Fourgeaud et al. [106], the dynamics of mGluR trafficking after cocaine remains poorly understood, and the analysis of subcellular/cell surface mGluR distribution in these two studies was conducted at non-overlapping withdrawal intervals (Mitrano [157]: 45 mins and 21 days vs. Fourgeaud [106]: 1 day). Indeed, cocaine-induced changes in structural accumbal plasticity have a dynamic pattern that depends both on the prior history of cocaine exposure (changes can last for weeks) and the time delay since the last cocaine administration (changes occur within hours; [158]). It is also possible that there are differences in how cocaine exposure regulates mGlu1 vs. mGlu5 surface trafficking. Unlike cocaine, acute local administration of mGlu1/5 agonist (DHPG) readily reduced plasma membrane localization of both mGlu1 and mGlu5 [157]. Adding to the complexity of mGlu1/5 trafficking regulation by cocaine, a study by Knackstedt et al. [107] revealed that in self-administration paradigms, wherein cocaine delivery is contingent upon the conditioned operant response, the post-cocaine behavioral experience itself can alter trafficking of mGluRs (also see the paragraph below). In this study, rats that underwent extinction training following chronic cocaine self-administration displayed reduced mGlu5 surface expression and increased Homer1b/c expression in the NAc (core) as measured 21 days after the last self-administration session. In contrast, no changes were observed in abstinence-only rats at this time point. Though it is possible that the reduction of surface mGlu5 in the NAc of abstinent rats emerges at a later withdrawal time point (e.g., 48 days, [159]). Besides the withdrawal time and post-cocaine behavioral experience, cocaine exposure can produce divergent changes in mGluR surface expression and mGluR-dependent synaptic plasticity across different brain regions. Accordingly, a reduced mGlu5 surface expression was observed in the dorsal striatum in abstinence rats at 21 days after the last cocaine self-administration session [160], while no changes were observed in the NAc at the same time point [107]. To summarize, there is corroborating evidence that cocaine exposure reduces surface expression of mGlu1 and/or mGlu5 in the striatum, with the length of withdrawal, additional behavioral experience (extinction), and the striatal subregion acting as variables that need to be considered. Only one study to date analyzed the surface expression of mGlu2/3 receptors after cocaine [161]. In this study, chronic cocaine self-administration followed by 12 days of extinction training reduced surface expression of mGlu2 (but not mGlu3) equally in male and female rats. Finally, the emerging evidence has allowed to formulate initial hypotheses on how the findings of dysregulated mGluR trafficking relate to the known behavioral and synaptic plasticity produced by cocaine. For example, reduced surface expression of mGlu1 in the NAc observed in animals that display behavioral sensitization to cocaine [157] can be interpreted as a ‘protective neuroadaptation’ reducing the long-term effects of cocaine. Similarly, reduced mGlu5 surface expression in the NAc and cortico-striatal LTD (together with increased Homer1b/c) that was observed only in animals that successfully completed post-cocaine extinction trials suggests a ‘protective character’ of this neuroadaptation that is introduced through extinction learning [107]. However, these neuroadaptations alone are insufficient to suppress post-cocaine behaviors. A more robust intervention, such as pharmacological modulation of mGlu1 and mGlu5, or over-expression of long Homer protein, is necessary to inhibit the emergence of behavioral sensitization [162], or reinstatement of cocaine-seeking [107, 160, 163]. Such interventions were also able to restore the ‘normal’ mGlu1- and/or mGlu5-dependent synaptic plasticity [159, 160, 164]. It should be noted that more information is needed to understand the behavioral significance of dysregulated mGluR trafficking after cocaine, and it is unlikely that a sole, universal intervention applies to all scenarios. For example, while intra-NAc inhibition of mGlu5 reproducibly reduces cocaine-seeking, this anti-relapse strategy is ineffective when applied to the dorsal striatum, and worse, it interferes with the extinction learning and normalization of mGlu5 surface expression in this brain region [165]. On the other hand, administration of mGlu1 or mGlu5 positive allosteric modulators can ‘normalize’ the reduced function of these receptors, restore striatal synaptic plasticity and reduce persistent cocaine seeking without significant learning side effects [159, 160, 166].

The question of whether the changes in mGlu tra-fficking observed after cocaine can be generalized to other abused drugs or are drug-specific remains largely unanswered. Early studies indicated that a single methamphetamine administration does not alter mGlu5 surface expression in several forebrain regions (including the PFC, NAc, and ventral pallidum), as measured 1 day after the acute drug administration [167]. However, when evaluated 1 day after the expression of methamphetamine conditioned place preference (CPP), surface expression of mGlu5 was found to be reduced selectively in the PFC [168]. It is likely that the loss of surface mGlu5 cannot be generalized across different treatment paradigms, as the same group reported unchanged surface levels of mGlu5 in the PFC, 1 day after the expression of methamphetamine behavioral sensitization [167]. To highlight the importance of drug / methodological factors when interpreting changes in drug-induced mGluR surface trafficking, Mao et al. [169] found an increase in mGlu5 surface expression in the PFC measured immediately after the expression of amphetamine CPP. Only three studies to date evaluated the surface expression of mGluRs after chronic methamphetamine self-administration. Murray et al. [170, 171] reported that both mGlu1 and mGlu5 surface expression, as well as long Homer levels in the NAc core tissue, were not altered in rats with a history of extended-access methamphetamine self-administration regardless of the length of post-methamphetamine abstinence. In our study, Schwendt et al. [172], utilizing a similar methamphetamine self-administration paradigm, mGlu2/3 and mGlu7 surface expression was analyzed in the selected forebrain regions after 14 days of extinction training or home-cage abstinence. Akin to our prior observations Knackstedt et al. [107], an effect of extinction training on mGluR surface expression was observed. Specifically, decreased surface expression of both mGlu2/3 and mGlu7 was observed in the PFC, with lower surface levels of mGlu2/3 also detected NAc and dorsal striatum of abstinent rats. Interestingly, daily extinction training reversed these changes, except for the reduced mGlu2/3 surface expression in the PFC [172]. Therefore, our observations suggest that extinction learning, through a currently unknown mechanism, can selectively restore cell surface availability of some, but not all, populations of mGluRs downregulated by prior exposure to abused drugs [107, 172]. This is not a far-fetched concept, as (post-cocaine) extinction training has been associated with changes in trafficking or subcellular redistribution of glutamate receptors in some rat brain regions [19, 173].

There is only sparse evidence that extends the observations of altered mGluR surface trafficking outside the psychostimulant drug research. For example, a single study by Herrold et al. [167] reported that repeated morphine administration increased mGlu5 surface expression in the ventral pallidum, as detected 14 days after the last morphine injection.

CONCLUSIONS

Cell surface trafficking of neurotransmitter receptors is a fundamental process through which synaptic transmission can be dynamically regulated. While key mechanisms and proteins governing receptor trafficking have been described in recent years, an overview of a rapidly-developing research area on mGluR trafficking and its significance for maladaptive behavioral and synaptic plasticity has been lacking. This review summarizes the basic cellular determinants of mGluR trafficking, addresses clinical evidence supporting mGluR trafficking in the (addicted) brain, and dissects available evidence of mGluR trafficking in animal models of drug-induced neurobehavioral plasticity. As current knowledge supports the concept that drug addiction (substance use disorder) is a disorder of staged glutamatergic plasticity, advances in our understanding of mGluR trafficking may provide unique opportunities for the development of future pharmacotherapies of addiction. Currently, available therapies of addiction are largely ineffective and/or are plagued by significant side effects. Additionally, chronic use of addictive drugs often reduces surface availability of target receptors (e.g., see studies on mGlu5 availability in substance use disorder), further diminishing the efficacy and potency of traditional ligand-based medications. Alternatively, therapies that rely on interference peptides that disrupt specific receptor-protein interactions, or small molecules targeting proteins interacting with the receptor, can restore the availability and function of endogenous receptors, providing a safer and more selective treatment approach.

Footnotes

FUNDING

This study was supported by the pilot research grant from the McKnight Brain Institute at the University of Florida and by the NIH/NIDA R03 DA049212 grant (both awarded to MS).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

None.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.

References

Willard

Koochekpour

. Glutamate, glutamate receptors, and downstream signaling pathways. Int J Biol Sci. 2013;9(9):948–59.

Pál

. Involvement of extrasynaptic glutamate in physiological and pathophysiological changes of neuronal excitability. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2018;75(16):2917–49.

Nakanishi

. Metabotropic glutamate receptors: Synaptic transmission, modulation, and plasticity. Neuron. 1994;13(5):1031–7.

Blasco

Mavel

Corcia

Gordon

. The Glutamate Hypothesis in ALS: Pathophysiology and Drug Development. Curr Med Chem. 2014;21(31):3551–75.

Matute

. Glutamate and ATP signalling in white matter pathology. J Anat. 2011;219(1):53–64.

Yang

Chang

C-L

. Glutamate-Mediated Signaling and Autism Spectrum Disorders: Emerging Treatment Targets. Curr Pharm Des. 2014;20(32):5186–93.

Kostic

Zivkovic

Stojanovic

. Multiple sclerosis and glutamate excitotoxicity. Rev Neurosci. 2013;24(1):71–88.

Schoepp

Conn

. Metabotropic glutamate receptors in brain function and pathology. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 1993;14(1):13–20.

Kew

JNC

Kemp

. Ionotropic and metabotropic glutamate receptor structure and pharmacology. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2005;179(1):4–29.

10.

Lau

Tymianski

. Glutamate receptors, neurotoxicity and neurodegeneration. Pflugers Arch Eur J Physiol. 2010;460(2):525–42.

11.

Mao

L-M

Guo

M-L

Jin

D-Z

Fibuch

Choe

Wang

. Post-translational modification biology of glutamate receptors and drug addiction. Front Neuroanat. 2011;5(March):19.

12.

Qiu

X-Y

Zhuo

. Post-translational modification of NMDA receptor GluN2B subunit and its roles in chronic pain and memory. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2011;22(5):521–9.

13.

Scheefhals

MacGillavry

. Functional organization of postsynaptic glutamate receptors. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2018;91:82–94.

14.

Anggono

Huganir

. Regulation of AMPA receptor trafficking and synaptic plasticity. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2012;22(3):461–9.

15.

Lau

Zukin

. NMDA receptor trafficking in synaptic plasticity and neuropsychiatric disorders. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2007;8(6):413–26.

16.

Rumpel

LeDoux

Zador

Malinow

. Postsynaptic receptor trafficking underlying a form of associative learning. Science (80-). 2005;308(5718):83–8.

17.

Humeau

Reisel

Johnson

Borchardt

Jensen

Gebhardt

, et al. A pathway-specific function for different AMPA receptor subunits in amygdala long-term potentiation and fear conditioning. J Neurosci. 2007;27(41):10947–56.

18.

Chang

Savage

Flood

Thomas

Levy

Mahadomrongkul

, et al. AMPA receptor downscaling at the onset of Alzheimer’s disease pathology in double knockin mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(9):3410–5.

19.

Caffino

Frankowska

Giannotti

Miszkiel

Sadakierska-Chudy

Racagni

, et al. Cocaine-induced glutamate receptor trafficking is abrogated by extinction training in the rat hippocampus. Pharmacol Reports. 2014;66(2):198–204.

20.

Bellone

Lüscher

Mameli

. Mechanisms of synaptic depression triggered by metabotropic glutamate receptors. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2008;65(18):2913–23.

21.

Bortolotto

Fitzjohn

Collingridge

. Roles of metabotropic glutamate receptors in LTP and LTD in the hippocampus. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1999;9(3):299–304.

22.

J-P

Duvoisin

. The metabotropic glutamate receptors: Structure and functions. Neuropharmacology. 1995;34(1):1–26.

23.

Schaffhauser

Cartmell

Jakob-Røtne

Mutel

. Pharmacological characterization of metabotropic glutamate receptors linked to the inhibition of adenylate cyclase activity in rat striatal slices. Neuropharmacology. 1997;36(7):933–40.

24.

Conn

J-P

. Pharmacology and functions of metabotropic glutamate receptors. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1997;37(1):205–37.

25.

Page

Khidir

FAL

Pain

Barrier

Fauconneau

Guillard

, et al. Group I metabotropic glutamate receptors activate the p70S6 kinase via both mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK 1/2) signaling pathways in rat striatal and hippocampal synaptoneurosomes. Neurochem Int. 2006;49(4):413–21.

26.

Iacovelli

Bruno

Salvatore

Melchiorri

Gradini

Caricasole

, et al. Native group-III metabotropic glutamate receptors are coupled to the mitogen-activated protein kinase/phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase pathways. J Neurochem. 2002;82(2):216–23.

27.

Kim

Braud

Isaac

JTR

Roche

. Protein Kinase C Phosphorylation of the Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor mGluR5 on Serine 839 Regulates Ca ²⁺ Oscillations. J Biol Chem. 2005;280(27):25409–15.

28.

Mahato

Pandey

Bhattacharyya

. Differential effects of protein phosphatases in the recycling of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5. Neuroscience. 2015;306:138–50.

29.

Mao

L-M

Jin

D-Z

Xue

Chu

X-P

Wang

. Phosphorylation and regulation of glutamate receptors by CaMKII. Sheng Li Xue Bao. 2014;66(3):365–72.

30.

Jin

Mao

Wang

. The Role of Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinases (ERK) in the Regulation of mGlu5 Receptors in Neurons. J Mol Neurosci. 2018;66(4).

31.

Murat

Bigot

Chapron

König

Kostenis

Battaglia

, et al. 5-HT2A receptor-dependent phosphorylation of mGlu2 receptor at Serine 843 promotes mGlu2 receptor-operated Gi/o signaling. Mol Psychiatry. 2019;24(11):1610–26.

32.

Suh

Chang

Roche

. Metabotropic glutamate receptor trafficking. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2018;91:10–24.

33.

. Trafficking of GPCRs. Wu G, editor. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci. 2015;132:xiii.

34.

Dhami

Ferguson

SSG

. Regulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling, desensitization and endocytosis. Pharmacol Ther. 2006;111(1):260–71.

35.

Pula

Mundell

Roberts

Kelly

. Agonist-independent internalization of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1a is arrestin- and clathrin-dependent and is suppressed by receptor inverse agonists. J Neurochem. 2004;89(4):1009–20.

36.

Magalhaes

Dunn

Ferguson

SSG

. Regulation of GPCR activity, trafficking and localization by GPCR-interacting proteins. Br J Pharmacol. 2012;165(6):1717–36.

37.

Dhami

Ferguson

SSGG

. Regulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling, desensitization and endocytosis. Pharmacol Ther. 2006;111(1):260–71.

38.

Iacovelli

Nicoletti

De Blasi

. Molecular mechanisms that desensitize metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling: An overview. Neuropharmacology. 2013;66:24–30.

39.

Mundell

Pula

Carswell

Roberts

Kelly

. Agonist-induced internalization of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1A: Structural determinants for protein kinase C- and G protein-coupled receptor kinase-mediated internalization. J Neurochem. 2003;84(2):294–304.

40.

Sorensen

Conn

. G protein-coupled receptor kinases regulate metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 function and expression. Neuropharmacology. 2003;44(6):699–706.

41.

Gomeza

Joly

Kuhn

Knöpfel

Bockaert

. The second intracellular loop of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 cooperates with the other intracellular domains to control coupling to G-proteins. J Biol Chem. 1996;271(4):2199–205.

42.

Ferguson

SSG

. Evolving concepts in G protein-coupled receptor endocytosis: The role in receptor desensitization and signaling. Pharmacol Rev. 2001;53(1):1–24.

43.

Pitcher

Freedman

Lefkowitz

. G protein-coupled receptor kinases. Annu Rev Biochem. . 1998;67:653–92.

44.

Dhami

Anborgh

Dale

Sterne-Marr

Ferguson

SSG

. Phosphorylation-independent regulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling by G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(28):25266–72.

45.

Ribeiro

Ferreira

Paquet

Cregan

Ding

Gros

, et al. Phosphorylation-independent regulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 desensitization and internalization by G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 in neurons. J Biol Chem. 2009;284(35):23444–53.

46.

Zhang

Xue

Guo

Ding

Huang

. Phosphorylation-independent desensitization of metabo-tropic glutamate receptor 5 by G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 in HEK 293 cells. Mol Biol. 2013;47(1):123–30.

47.

Iacovelli

Capobianco

Iula

Di Giorgi Gerevini

Picascia

Blahos

, et al. Regulation of mGlu4 metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling by type-2 G-protein coupled receptor kinase (GRK2). Mol Pharmacol. 2004;65(5):1103–10.

48.

Iacovelli

Salvatore

Capobianco

Picascia

Barletta

Storto

, et al. Role of G protein-coupled receptor kinase 4 and beta-arrestin 1 in agonist-stimulated metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 internalization and activation of mitogen-activated protein kinases. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(14):12433–42.

49.

Goodman

Krupnick

Santini

Gurevich

V V

Penn

Gagnon

et al. β-Arrestin acts as a clathrin adaptor in endocytosis of the β2- adrenergic receptor. Nature. 1996;383(6599):447–50.

50.

Kim

Benovic

. Differential roles of arrestin-2 interaction with clathrin and adaptor protein 2 in G protein-coupled receptor trafficking. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(34):30760–8.

51.

Crépieux

Poupon

Langonné-Gallay

Reiter

Delgado

Schaefer

, et al. A comprehensive view of the ß-arrestinome. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2017;8(MAR).

52.

Stoppel

Auerbach

Senter

Preza

Lefkowitz

Bear

. β-Arrestin2 Couples Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 5 to Neuronal Protein Synthesis and Is a Potential Target to Treat Fragile X. Cell Rep. 2017;18(12):2807–14.

53.

Iacovelli

Felicioni

Nisticò

Nicoletti

De Blasi

. Selective regulation of recombinantly expressed mGlu7 metabotropic glutamate receptors by G protein-coupled receptor kinases and arrestins. Neuropharmacology. 2014;77:303–12.

54.

Eng

Kelver

Hedrick

Swanson

. Transduction of group I mGluR-mediated synaptic plasticity by β-arrestin2 signalling. Nat Commun. 2016;7.

55.

Wang

Jia

Zhang

Cai

Mao

, et al. Beta-arrestin1 and 2 differently modulate metabotropic glutamate receptor 7 signaling in rat developmental sevoflurane-induced neuronal apoptosis. Neuroscience. 2016;313:199–212.

56.

Emery

Pshenichkin

Takoudjou

Grajkowska

Wolfe

Wroblewski

. The protective signaling of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 is mediated by sustained, β-arrestin-1-dependent ERK phosphorylation. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(34):26041–8.

57.

Emery

DiRaddo

Miller

Hathaway

Pshenichkin

Takoudjou

, et al. Ligand bias at metabotropic glutamate 1a receptors: Molecular determinants that distinguish β-arrestin-mediated from G protein-mediated signaling. Mol Pharmacol. 2012;82(2):291–301.

58.

Pula

Mundell

Roberts

Kelly

. Agonist-independent internalization of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1a is arrestin- and clathrin-dependent and is suppressed by receptor inverse agonists. J Neurochem. 2004;89(4):1009–20.

59.

Mundell

Matharu

Pula

Holman

Roberts

Kelly

. Metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 internalization induced by muscarinic acetylcholine receptor activation: differential dependency of internalization of splice variants on nonvisual arrestins. Mol Pharmacol. 2002;61(5):1114–23.

60.

Lee

Park

Lee

Han

Song

Han

, et al. Nedd4 E3 ligase and beta-arrestins regulate ubiquitination, trafficking, and stability of the mGlu7 receptor. Elife. 2019;8.

61.

Pelkey

Yuan

Lavezzari

Roche

McBain

. mGluR7 undergoes rapid internalization in response to activation by the allosteric agonist AMN082. Neuropharmacology. 2007;52(1):108–17.

62.

Kirchhausen

. Clathrin. Annu Rev Biochem. 2000;69:699–727.

63.

Conner

Schmid

. Regulated portals of entry into the cell. Nature. 2003;422(6927):37–44.

64.

Martín

Sanz

Cubero

. Characterization of metabotropic glutamate receptors coupled to a pertussis toxin sensitive G-protein in bovine brain coated vesicles. FEBS Lett. 1993;316(2):191–6.

65.

Martin

Sanz

Ros

Cubero

. Metabotropic glutamate receptor analogues inhibit p[NH]ppG-stimulated phospholipase C activity in bovine brain coated vesicles: Involvement of a pertussis toxin-sensitive G-protein. Biochem J. 1995;307(3):851–7.

66.

Luis Albasanz

Fernandez

Martin

. Internalization of metabotropic glutamate receptor in C6 cells through clathrin-coated vesicles. Mol Brain Res. 2002;99(1):54–66.

67.

Pula

Mundell

Roberts

Kelly

. Analysis of mGluR1a constitutive internalization using a pulse-chase enzyme-linked immuno-sorbant assay (ELISA). J Biochem Biophys Methods. 2005;64(3):167–81.

68.

Pandey

Mahato

Bhattacharyya

. Metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 recycles to the cell surface in protein phosphatase 2A-dependent manner in non-neuronal and neuronal cell lines. J Neurochem. 2014;131(5):602–14.

69.

Francesconi

Kumari

Zukin

Purpura

. Regulation of group I metabotropic glutamate receptor trafficking and signaling by the caveolar/lipid raft pathway. J Neurosci. 2009;29(11):3590–602.

70.

Chin

Means

. Calmodulin: a prototypical calcium sensor. Trends Cell Biol. 2000;10(8):322–8.

71.

Choi

Chung

Roche

. Differential Binding of Calmodulin to Group I Metabotropic Glutamate Receptors Regulates Receptor Trafficking and Signaling. J Neurosci. 2011;31(16):5921–30.

72.

Lee

Choi

Hepp

Lee

J-Y

Lim

, et al. Calmodulin dynamically regulates the trafficking of the metabotropic glutamate receptor mGluR5. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(34):12575–80.

73.

Minakami

Jinnai

Sugiyama

. Phosphorylation and calmodulin binding of the metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 (mGluR5) are antagonistic in vitro . J Biol Chem. 1997;272(32):20291–8.

74.

Schwendt

Olive

. Protein kinase Cɛ activity regulates mGluR5 surface expression in the rat nucleus accumbens. J Neurosci Res. 2016;00:1–12.

75.

Choi

Chung

Roche

. Differential binding of calmodulin to group I metabotropic glutamate receptors regulates receptor trafficking and signaling. J Neurosci. 2011;31(16):5921–30.

76.

Raka

Di Sebastiano

Kulhawy

Ribeiro

Godin

Caetano

, et al. Ca(2+)/Calmodulin-dependent protein Kinase II interacts with group I Metabotropic Glutamate and facilitates Receptor Endocytosis and ERK1/2 signaling: role of β-Amyloid. Mol Brain. 2015;8(1):21.

77.

Marks

Shonesy

Wang

Stephenson

Niswender

Colbran

. Activated CaMKIIa binds to the mGlu5 metabotropic glutamate receptor and modulates calcium mobilization. Mol Pharmacol. 2018;94(6):1352–62.

78.

Nakajima

Yamamoto

Nakayama

Nakanishi

. A relationship between protein kinase C phosphorylation and calmodulin binding to the metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 7. J Biol Chem. 1999;274(39):27573–7.

79.

O’Connor

El Far

Bofill-Cardona

Nanoff

Freissmuth

Karschin

, et al. Calmodulin dependence of presynaptic metabotropic glutamate receptor signaling. Science. 1999;286(5442):1180–4.

80.

El Far

Bofill-Cardona

Airas

O’Connor

Boehm

Freissmuth

, et al. Mapping of Calmodulin and Gβ γ Binding Domains within the C-terminal Region of the Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 7A. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(33):30662–9.

81.

Mathiesen

Ramirez

. The metabotropic glutamate receptor 4 is internalized and desensitized upon protein kinase C activation. Br J Pharmacol. 2006;148(3):279–90.

82.

Dev

Nakajima

Kitano

Braithwaite

Henley

Nakanishi

. PICK1 interacts with and regulates PKC phosphorylation of mGLUR7. J Neurosci. 2000;20(19):7252–7.

83.

Suh

Pelkey

Lavezzari

Roche

Huganir

McBain

, et al. Corequirement of PICK1 binding and PKC phosphorylation for stable surface expression of the metabotropic glutamate receptor mGluR7. Neuron. 2008;58(5):736–48.

84.

Suh

Park

Jou

Roche

. Regulation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 7 (mGluR7) internalization and surface expression by Ser/Thr protein phosphatase 1. J Biol Chem. 2013;288(24):17544–51.

85.

Mahato

Pandey

Bhattacharyya

. Differential effects of protein phosphatases in the recycling of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5. Neuroscience. 2015;306:138–50.

86.

Flajolet

Rakhilin

Wang

Starkova

Nuangchamnong

Nairn

, et al. Protein phosphatase 2C binds selectively to and dephosphorylates metabotropic glutamate receptor 3. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(26):16006–11.

87.

Croci

Sticht

Brandstätter

Enz

. Group I metabotropic glutamate receptors bind to protein phosphatase 1C: Mapping and modeling of interacting sequences. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(50):50682–90.

88.

Hutagalung

Novick

. Role of Rab GTPases in Membrane Traffic and Cell Physiology. Physiol Rev. 2011;91(1):119–49.

89.

Wang

. Small GTPase regulation of GPCR anterograde trafficking. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2012;33(1):28–34.

90.

Grimsey

Goodfellow

Dragunow

Glass

. Cannabinoid receptor 2 undergoes Rab5-mediated internalization and recycles via a Rab11-dependent pathway. Biochim Biophys Acta - Mol Cell Res. 2011;1813(8):1554–60.

91.

Schmidlin

Déry

DeFea

Slice

Patierno

Sternini

, et al. Dynamin and Rab5a-dependent Trafficking and Signaling of the Neurokinin 1 Receptor. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(27):25427–37.

92.

Mizuno-Yamasaki

Rivera-Molina

Novick

. GTPase networks in membrane traffic. Annu Rev Biochem. 2012;81:637–59.

93.

Esseltine

Ribeiro

Ferguson

SSG

. Rab8 modulates metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 1 intracellular trafficking and signaling in a protein kinase C-dependent manner. J Neurosci. 2012;32(47):16933–42a.

94.

Bhattacharya

. Ral and Phospholipase D2-Dependent Pathway for Constitutive Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor Endocytosis. J Neurosci. 2004;24(40):8752–61.

95.

Shiraishi-Yamaguchi

Furuichi

. The Homer family proteins. Genome Biol. 2007;8(2):206.

96.

Xiao

Yuan

Lanahan

Leoffert

, et al. Homer binds a novel proline-rich motif and links group I metabotropic glutamate receptors with IP3 receptors. Neuron. 1998;21(4):717–26.

97.

Ango

Robbe

Xiao

Worley

, et al. Homer-dependent cell surface expression of metabotropic glutamate receptor type 5 in neurons. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2002;20(2):323–9.

98.

Xiao

Naisbitt

Yuan

Petralia

Brakeman

, et al. Coupling of mGluR/Homer and PSD-95 complexes by the Shank family of postsynaptic density proteins. Neuron. 1999;23(3):583–92.

99.

Kammermeier

. Surface clustering of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 induced by long Homer proteins. BMC Neurosci. 2006;7:1.

100.

Roche

Petralia

Xiao

Wenthold

Worley

. Homer 1b Regulates the Trafficking of Group I Metabotropic Glutamate Receptors * constitutively expressed splice form of the immediate. Science (80-). 1999;274(36):25953–7.

101.

Pignatelli

Piccinin

Molinaro

Di Menna

Riozzi

Cannella

, et al. Changes in mGlu5 receptor-dependent synaptic plasticity and coupling to homer proteins in the hippocampus of Ube3A hemizygous mice modeling angelman syndrome. J Neurosci. 2014;34(13):4558–66.

102.

Ménard

Quirion

. Successful cognitive aging in rats: A role for mGluR5 glutamate receptors, homer 1 proteins and downstream signaling pathways. PLoS One. 2012;7(1):28666.

103.

Guo

Ceolin

Collins

KAA

Perroy

Huber

KMM

. Elevated CaMKIIα and Hyperphosphorylation of Homer Mediate Circuit Dysfunction in a Fragile X Syndrome Mouse Model. Cell Rep. 2015;13(10):2297–311.

104.

Guhan

. Homer-PIKE complex: A novel link between mGluRI and PI 3-kinase. Vol. 27, Trends in Neurosciences. Elsevier Ltd; 2004. pp. 645-8.

105.

Joffe

Santiago

Stansley

Maksymetz

Gogliotti

Engers

, et al. Mechanisms underlying prelimbic prefrontal cortex mGlu 3 /mGlu 5 -dependent plasticity and reversal learning deficits following acute stress. Neuropharmacology. 2019;144:19–28.

106.

Fourgeaud

Mato

Bouchet

Hémar

Worley

Manzoni

. A single In Vivo exposure to cocaine abolishes endocannabinoid-mediated long-term depression in the nucleus accumbens. J Neurosci. 2004;24(31):6939–45.

107.

Knackstedt

Moussawi

Lalumiere

Schwendt

Klugmann

Kalivas

. Extinction Training after Cocaine Self-Administration Induces Glutamatergic Plasticity to Inhibit Cocaine Seeking. J Neurosci. 2010;30(23):7984–92.

108.

Wills

Baucum

Holleran

Chen

Pasek

Delpire

, et al. Chronic intermittent alcohol disrupts the GluN2B-associated proteome and specifically regulates group I mGlu receptor-dependent long-term depression. Addict Biol. 2017;22(2):275–90.

109.

Williams

Lisanti

. The caveolin proteins. Genome Biol. 2004;5(3):214.

110.

Hong

Kim

Lee

Chae

Jang

Jeon

, et al. Agonist-induced internalization of mGluR1α is mediated by caveolin. J Neurochem. 2009;111(1):61–71.

111.

Kumari

Castillo

Francesconi

. Agonist-dependent signaling by group I metabotropic glutamate receptors is regulated by association with lipid domains. J Biol Chem. 2013;288(44):32004–19.

112.

Takayasu

Takeuchi

Kumari

Bennett

MVL

Zukin

Francesconi

. Caveolin-1 knockout mice exhibit impaired induction of mGluR-dependent long-term depression at CA3-CA1 synapses. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2010;107(50):21778–83.

113.

Kitano

Kimura

Yamazaki

Soda

Shigemoto

Nakajima

, et al. Tamalin, a PDZ domain-containing protein, links a protein complex formation of group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptors and the guanine nucleotide exchange factor cytohesins. J Neurosci. 2002;22(4):1280–9.

114.

Sugi

Oyama

Muto

Nakanishi

Morikawa

Jingami

. Crystal structures of autoinhibitory PDZ domain of Tamalin: implications for metabotropic glutamate receptor trafficking regulation. EMBO J. 2007;26(8):2192–205.

115.

Enz

. Structure of metabotropic glutamate receptor C-terminal domains in contact with interacting proteins. Front Mol Neurosci. 2012;5(April):52.

116.

Pandey

Ramsakha

Sharma

Gulia

Ojha

, et al. The post-synaptic scaffolding protein tamalin regulates ligand-mediated trafficking of metabotropic glutamate receptors. J Biol Chem. 2020;295(25):8575–88.

117.

Allen

Ouimet

Greengard

. Spinophilin, a novel protein phosphatase 1 binding protein localized to dendritic spines. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997;94(18):9956–61.

118.

Di Sebastiano

Fahim

Dunn

Walther

Ribeiro

Cregan

, et al. Role of Spinophilin in Group I Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor Endocytosis, Signaling, and Synaptic Plasticity. 2016;291(34):722355.

119.

Morris

Watkins

Salek

Edler

Baucum

. The association of spinophilin with disks large-associated protein 3 (SAPAP3) is regulated by metabotropic glutamate receptor (mGluR) 5. Mol Cell Neurosci. 2018;90:60–9.

120.

Areal

Hamilton

Martins-Silva

Pires

RGW

Ferguson

SSG

. Neuronal scaffolding protein spinophilin is integral for cocaine-induced behavioral sensitization and ERK1/2 activation. Mol Brain. 2019;12(1):15.

121.

Shinozaki

Kume

Kuzume

Obata

Maruyama

. Norbin, a neurite-outgrowth-related protein, is a cytosolic protein localized in the somatodendritic region of neurons and distributed prominently in dendritic outgrowth in Purkinje cells. Mol Brain Res. 1999;71(2):364–8.

122.

Wang

Westin

Nong

Birnbaum

Bendor

Brismar

, et al. Norbin is an endogenous regulator of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 signaling. Science (80-). 2009;326(5959):1554–7.

123.

Matosin

Fernandez-Enright

Fung

Lum

Engel

Andrews

, et al. Alterations of mGluR5 and its endogenous regulators Norbin, Tamalin and Preso1 in schizophrenia: towards a model of mGluR5 dysregulation. Acta Neuropathol. 2015;130(1):119–29.

124.

Wang

MacDonald

Borgmann-Winter

Banerjee

Sleiman

Tom

, et al. mGluR5 hypofunction is integral to glutamatergic dysregulation in schizophrenia. Mol Psychiatry. 2020;25(4):750–60.

125.

Lin

T Bin

Lai

Hsieh

Wang

Cheng

Chau

, et al. VPS26A-SNX27 interaction-dependent MGLUR5 recycling in dorsal horn neurons mediates neuropathic pain in rats. J Neurosci. 2015;35(44):14943–55.

126.

Sharma

Gulia

Bhattacharyya

. A critical role for sorting nexin 1 in the trafficking of metabotropic glutamate receptors. J Neurosci. 2018;38(40):8605–20.

127.

MacDonald

Brown

Selvais

Liu

Waring

Newman

, et al. HRS-WASH axis governs actin-mediated endosomal recycling and cell invasion. J Cell Biol. 2018;217(7):2549–64.

128.

Mao

Liu

Zhang

Chu

Fibuch

Wang

, et al. phosphorylation of group I metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR1/5) in vitro and in vivo . Neuropharmacology. 2008;55(4):403–8.

129.

Mundell

Matharu

Pula

Holman

Roberts

Kelly

130.

Sallese

Salvatore

D’Urbano

Sala

Storto

Launey

, et al. The G-protein-coupled receptor kinase GRK4 mediates homologous desensitization of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1. FASEB J. 2000;14(15):2569–80.

131.

Mao

Wang

. Dopamine D2 receptors are involved in the regulation of fyn and metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 phosphorylation in the rat striatum in vivo . J Neurosci Res. 2016;94(4):329–38.

132.

Eifler

Vertegaal

ACO

. Mapping the SUMOylated landscape. FEBS J. 2015;282(19):3669–80.

133.

Flotho

Melchior

. Sumoylation: A regulatory protein modification in health and disease. Annu Rev Biochem. 2013;82(1):357–85.

134.

Choi

Park

Lee

Han

Park

, et al. Regulation of mGluR7 trafficking by SUMOylation in neurons. Neuropharmacology. 2016;102:229–35.

135.

Gulia

Sharma

Bhattacharyya

. A critical role for ubiquitination in the endocytosis of Glutamate receptors. J Biol Chem. 2016;

136.

Moriyoshi

Iijima

Fujii

Ito

Cho

Nakanishi

. Seven in absentia homolog 1A mediates ubiquitination and degradation of group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(23):8614–9.

137.

Isozaki

Kim

Lee

Cho

Sohn

, et al. PKC phosphorylation regulates mGluR5 trafficking by enhancing binding of Siah-1A. J Neurosci. 2012;32(46):16391–401.

138.

Mao

Guo

Jin

Fibuch

Choe

Wang

. Post-translational modification biology of glutamate receptors and drug addiction. Front Neuroanat. 2011;5(March):19.

139.

Vincent

Cornea

Jong

YJI

Laferriere

Kumar

Mickeviciute

, et al. Intracellular mGluR5 plays a critical role in neuropathic pain. Nat Commun. 2016;7(1):1–13.

140.

Sergin

Jong

YJI

Harmon

Kumar

O’Malley

. Sequences within the C terminus of the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) are responsible for inner nuclear membrane localization. J Biol Chem. 2017;292(9):3637–55.

141.

O’Malley

Jong

YJI

Gonchar

Burkhalter

Romano

. Activation of metabotropic glutamate receptor mGlu5 on nuclear membranes mediates intranuclear Ca2+changes in heterologous cell types and neurons. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(30):28210–9.

142.

Kumar

Jong

YJI

O’Malley

. Activated nuclear metabotropic glutamate receptor mGlu5 couples to nuclear Gq/11 proteins to generate inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate-mediated nuclear Ca2+release. J Biol Chem. 2008;283(20):14072–83.

143.

Jong

YJI

Kumar

O’Malley

. Intracellular metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) activates signaling cascades distinct from cell surface counterparts. J Biol Chem. 2009;284(51):35827–38.

144.

Kumar

Fahey

Jong

YJI

Ramanan

O’Malley

. Activation of intracellular metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 in striatal neurons leads to up-regulation of genes associated with sustained synaptic transmission including Arc/Arg3. 1 protein. J Biol Chem. 2012;287(8):5412–25.

145.

Purgert

Izumi

Jong

YJI

Kumar

Zorumski

O’Malley

. Intracellular mGluR5 can mediate synaptic plasticity in the hippocampus. J Neurosci. 2014;34(13):4589–98.

146.

Matosin

Fernandez-Enright

Lum

Andrews

Engel

Huang

X-F

, et al. Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5, and its trafficking molecules Norbin and Tamalin, are increased in the CA1 hippocampal region of subjects with schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2015;166(1-3):212–8.

147.

Matosin

Fernandez-Enright

Lum

Newell

. Shifting towards a model of mGluR5 dysregulation in schizophrenia: Consequences for future schizophrenia treatment. Vol. 115, Neuropharmacology. Elsevier Ltd; 2017. pp. 73-91.

148.

Meyers

Salling

Almli

Ratanatharathorn

Uddin

Galea

, et al. Frequency of alcohol consumption in humans; the role of metabotropic glutamate receptors and downstream signaling pathways. Transl Psychiatry. 2015;5(6).

149.

Holmes

Girgenti

Davis

Pietrzak

Dellagioia

Nabulsi

, et al. Altered metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 markers in PTSD: In vivo and postmortem evidence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114(31):8390–5.

150.

Wong

Waterhouse

Kuwabara

Kim

Brašíc

Chamroonrat

, et al. 18F-FPEB, a PET radiopharmaceutical for quantifying metabotropic glutamate 5 receptors: A first-in-human study of radiochemical safety, biokinetics, and radiation dosimetry. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(3):388–96.

151.

Akkus

Treyer

Johayem

Ametamey

Mancilla

Sovago

, et al. Association of long-term nicotine abstinence with normal metabotropic glutamate receptor-5 binding. Biol Psychiatry. 2016;79(6):474–80.

152.

Milella

Marengo

Larcher

Fotros

Dagher

Rosa-Neto

, et al. Limbic system mGluR5 availability in cocaine dependent subjects: A high-resolution PET [11C]ABP688 study. Neuroimage. 2014;98:195–202.

153.

Sander

Hooker

Catana

Rosen

Mandeville

. Imaging Agonist-Induced D2/D3 Receptor Desensitization and Internalization In Vivo with PET/fMRI. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2016;41(5):1427–36.

154.

Crupi

Impellizzeri

Cuzzocrea

. Role of metabotropic glutamate receptors in neurological disorders. Vol. 12, Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience. Frontiers Media S.A.; 2019. pp. 20.

155.

Yohn

Galbraith

Calipari

Conn

. Shared Behavioral and Neurocircuitry Disruptions in Drug Addiction, Obesity, and Binge Eating Disorder: Focus on Group I mGluRs in the Mesolimbic Dopamine Pathway. Vol. 10, ACS Chemical Neuroscience. American Chemical Society; 2019. pp. 2125-43.

156.

Pomierny-Chamioło

Rup

Pomierny

Niedzielska

Kalivas

Filip

. Metabotropic glutamatergic receptors and their ligands in drug addiction. Pharmacol Ther. 2014;142(3):281–305.

157.

Mitrano

Arnold

Smith

. Subcellular and subsynaptic localization of group I metabotropic glutamate receptors in the nucleus accumbens of cocaine-treated rats. Neuroscience. 2008;154(2):653–66.

158.

Shen

Toda

Moussawi

Bouknight

Zahm

Kalivas

. Altered dendritic spine plasticity in cocaine-withdrawn rats. J Neurosci. 2009;29(9):2876–84.

159.

Loweth

Scheyer

Milovanovic

Lacrosse

Flores-Barrera

Werner

, et al. Synaptic depression via mGluR1 positive allosteric modulation suppresses cue-induced cocaine craving. Nat Neurosci. 2014;17(1):73–80.

160.

Knackstedt

Trantham-Davidson

Schwendt

. The role of ventral and dorsal striatum mGluR5 in relapse to cocaine-seeking and extinction learning. Addict Biol. 2014;19(1):87–101.

161.

Logan

Bechard

Hamor

Schwendt

Knackstedt

. Ceftriaxone and mGlu2/3 interactions in the nucleus accumbens core affect the reinstatement of cocaine-seeking in male and female rats. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2020;237(7):2007–18.

162.

Dravolina

Danysz

Bespalov

. Effects of group I metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists on the behavioral sensitization to motor effects of cocaine in rats. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2006;187(4):397–404.

163.

Kumaresan

Yuan

Yee

Famous

Anderson

Schmidt

, et al. Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) antagonists attenuate cocaine priming- and cue-induced reinstatement of cocaine seeking. Behav Brain Res. 2009;202(2):238–44.

164.

Wagner

K V

Hartmann

Mangold

Wang

Labermaier

Liebl

et al. Homer1 mediates acute stress-induced cognitive deficits in the dorsal hippocampus. J Neurosci. 2013;33(9):3857–64.

165.

Knackstedt

Schwendt

. mGlu5 Receptors and Relapse to Cocaine-Seeking: The Role of Receptor Trafficking in Postrelapse Extinction Learning Deficits. Neural Plast. 2016;2016:1–10.

166.

Gobin

Schwendt

. The cognitive cost of reducing relapse to cocaine-seeking with mGlu5 allosteric modulators. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2020;237(1):115–25.

167.

Herrold

Persons

Napier

. Cellular distribution of AMPA receptor subunits and mGlu5 following acute and repeated administration of morphine or methamphetamine. J Neurochem. 2013;126(4):503–17.

168.

Herrold

Voigt

Napier

. Brain region-selective cellular redistribution of mGlu5 but not GABA B receptors following methamphetamine-induced associative learning. Synapse. 2011;65(12):1333–43.

169.

Mao

Wang

. Amphetamine-induced Conditioned Place Preference and Changes in mGlu1/5 Receptor Expression and Signaling in the Rat Medial Prefrontal Cortex. Neuroscience. 2019;400:110–9.

170.

Murray

Loweth

Milovanovic

Stefanik

Caccamise

Dolubizno

, et al. AMPA receptor and metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 adaptations in the nucleus accumbens core during incubation of methamphetamine craving. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2019;44(9):1534–41.

171.

Murray

Christian

Milovanovic

Loweth

Hwang

E-K

Caccamise

, et al. mGlu5 function in the nucleus accumbens core during the incubation of methamphetamine craving. Neuropharmacology. 2021;186:108452.

172.

Schwendt

Reichel

See

. Extinction-dependent alterations in corticostriatal mGluR2/3 and mGluR7 receptors following chronic methamphetamine self-administration in rats. PLoS One. 2012;7(3).

173.

Ghasemzadeh

Vasudevan

Mueller

Seubert

Mantsch

. Neuroadaptations in the cellular and postsynaptic group 1 metabotropic glutamate receptor mGluR5 and Homer proteins following extinction of cocaine self-administration. Neurosci Lett. 2009;452(2):167–71.

174.

Scheefhals

Catsburg

Westerveld

Blanpied

Hoogenraad

MacGillavry

. Shank Proteins Couple the Endocytic Zone to the Postsynaptic Density to Control Trafficking and Signaling of Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor 5. Cell Rep. 2019;29(2):258–69.

Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor Trafficking and its Role in Drug-Induced Neurobehavioral Plasticity

Abstract

Keywords

INTRODUCTION

CELLULAR MECHANISMS REGULATING mGlu RECEPTOR TRAFFICKING

a. mGluR-interacting proteins that regulate receptor trafficking

GRK/arrestins/clathrin

Calcium/calmodulin/PKC

Protein phosphatases

Small GTPases

Homer proteins

Caveolin

Tamalin

Spinophilin

Norbin

Sorting nexins and related proteins

b. Post-translational modifications regulating mGluR trafficking

c. mGluR trafficking between intracellular compartments

mGluR TRAFFICKING IN THE HUMAN BRAIN

THE ROLE OF mGluR TRAFFICKING IN DRUG-INDUCED NEUROBEHAVIORAL PLASTICITY

CONCLUSIONS

Footnotes

FUNDING

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

References