Search

In mammalian taste buds, Type I cells comprise half of all cells. These are termed "glial-like" based on morphologic and molecular features, but there are limited studies describing their function. We tested whether Type I cells sense chemosensory activation of adjacent chemosensory (i.e., Types II and III) taste bud cells, similar to synaptic glia. Using Gad2 ;;GCaMP3 mice of both sexes, we confirmed by immunostaining that, within taste buds, GCaMP expression is predominantly in Type I cells (with no Type II and ≈28% Type III cells expressing weakly). In dissociated taste buds, GCaMP+ Type I cells responded to bath-applied ATP (10-100 μm) but not to 5-HT (transmitters released by Type II or III cells, respectively). Type I cells also did not respond to taste stimuli (5 μm cycloheximide, 1 mm denatonium). In lingual slice preparations also, Type I cells responded to bath-applied ATP (10-100 μm). However, when taste buds in the slice were stimulated with bitter tastants (cycloheximide, denatonium, quinine), Type I cells responded robustly. Taste-evoked responses of Type I cells in the slice preparation were significantly reduced by desensitizing purinoceptors or by purinoceptor antagonists (suramin, PPADS), and were essentially eliminated by blocking synaptic ATP release (carbenoxolone) or degrading extracellular ATP (apyrase). Thus, taste-evoked release of afferent ATP from type II chemosensory cells, in addition to exciting gustatory afferent fibers, also activates glial-like Type I taste cells. We speculate that Type I cells sense chemosensory activation and that they participate in synaptic signaling, similarly to glial cells at CNS tripartite synapses. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Most studies of taste buds view the chemosensitive excitable cells that express taste receptors as the sole mediators of taste detection and transmission to the CNS. Type I "glial-like" cells, with their ensheathing morphology, are mostly viewed as responsible for clearing neurotransmitters and as the "glue" holding the taste bud together. In the present study, we demonstrate that, when intact taste buds respond to their natural stimuli, Type I cells sense the activation of the chemosensory cells by detecting the afferent transmitter. Because Type I cells synthesize GABA, a known gliotransmitter, and cognate receptors are present on both presynaptic and postsynaptic elements, Type I cells may participate in GABAergic synaptic transmission in the manner of astrocytes at tripartite synapses., (Copyright © 2021 the authors.)

How taste buds detect NaCl remains poorly understood. Among other problems, applying taste-relevant concentrations of NaCl (50-500 mm) onto isolated taste buds or cells exposes them to unphysiological (hypo/hypertonic) conditions. To overcome these limitations, we used the anterior tongue of male and female mice to implement a slice preparation in which fungiform taste buds are in a relatively intact tissue environment and stimuli are limited to the taste pore. Taste-evoked responses were monitored using confocal Ca 2+ imaging via GCaMP3 expressed in Type 2 and Type 3 taste bud cells. NaCl evoked intracellular mobilization of Ca 2+ in the apical tips of a subset of taste cells. The concentration dependence and rapid adaptation of NaCl-evoked cellular responses closely resembled behavioral and afferent nerve responses to NaCl. Importantly, taste cell responses were not inhibited by the diuretic, amiloride. Post hoc immunostaining revealed that >80% of NaCl-responsive taste bud cells were of Type 2. Many NaCl-responsive cells were also sensitive to stimuli that activate Type 2 cells but never to stimuli for Type 3 cells. Ion substitutions revealed that amiloride-insensitive NaCl responses depended on Cl - rather than Na + Moreover, choline chloride, an established salt taste enhancer, was equally effective a stimulus as sodium chloride. Although the apical transducer for Cl - remains unknown, blocking known chloride channels and cotransporters had little effect on NaCl responses. Together, our data suggest that chloride, an essential nutrient, is a key determinant of taste transduction for amiloride-insensitive salt taste. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Sodium and chloride are essential nutrients and must be regularly consumed to replace excreted NaCl. Thus, understanding salt taste, which informs salt appetite, is important from a fundamental sensory perspective and forms the basis for interventions to replace/reduce excess Na + consumption. This study examines responses to NaCl in a semi-intact preparation of mouse taste buds. We identify taste cells that respond to NaCl in the presence of amiloride, which is significant because much of human salt taste also is amiloride-insensitive. Further, we demonstrate that Cl - , not Na + , generates these amiloride-insensitive salt taste responses. Intriguingly, choline chloride, a commercial salt taste enhancer, is also a highly effective stimulus for these cells., (Copyright © 2019 the authors.)

The gustatory system encodes information about chemical identity, nutritional value, and concentration of sensory stimuli before transmitting the signal from taste buds to central neurons that process and transform the signal. Deciphering the coding logic for taste quality requires examining responses at each level along the neural axis-from peripheral sensory organs to gustatory cortex. From the earliest single-fiber recordings, it was clear that some afferent neurons respond uniquely and others to stimuli of multiple qualities. There is frequently a "best stimulus" for a given neuron, leading to the suggestion that taste exhibits "labeled line coding." In the extreme, a strict "labeled line" requires neurons and pathways dedicated to single qualities (e.g., sweet, bitter, etc.). At the other end of the spectrum, "across-fiber," "combinatorial," or "ensemble" coding requires minimal specific information to be imparted by a single neuron. Instead, taste quality information is encoded by simultaneous activity in ensembles of afferent fibers. Further, "temporal coding" models have proposed that certain features of taste quality may be embedded in the cadence of impulse activity. Taste receptor proteins are often expressed in nonoverlapping sets of cells in taste buds apparently supporting "labeled lines." Yet, taste buds include both narrowly and broadly tuned cells. As gustatory signals proceed to the hindbrain and on to higher centers, coding becomes more distributed and temporal patterns of activity become important. Here, we present the conundrum of taste coding in the light of current electrophysiological and imaging techniques at several levels of the gustatory processing pathway., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The past decade has witnessed a consolidation and refinement of the extraordinary progress made in taste research. This Review describes recent advances in our understanding of taste receptors, taste buds, and the connections between taste buds and sensory afferent fibres. The article discusses new findings regarding the cellular mechanisms for detecting tastes, new data on the transmitters involved in taste processing and new studies that address longstanding arguments about taste coding.

Gustatory stimuli are detected by taste buds and transmitted to the hindbrain via sensory afferent neurons. Whether each taste quality (sweet, bitter and so on) is encoded by separate neurons ('labelled lines') remains controversial. We used mice expressing GCaMP3 in geniculate ganglion sensory neurons to investigate taste-evoked activity. Using confocal calcium imaging, we recorded responses to oral stimulation with prototypic taste stimuli. Up to 69% of neurons respond to multiple tastants. Moreover, neurons tuned to a single taste quality at low concentration become more broadly tuned when stimuli are presented at higher concentration. Responses to sucrose and monosodium glutamate are most related. Although mice prefer dilute NaCl solutions and avoid concentrated NaCl, we found no evidence for two separate populations of sensory neurons that encode this distinction. Altogether, our data suggest that taste is encoded by activity in patterns of peripheral sensory neurons and challenge the notion of strict labelled line coding.

Epithelial tissues are characterized by specialized cell-cell junctions, typically localized to the apical regions of cells. These junctions are formed by interacting membrane proteins and by cytoskeletal and extracellular matrix components. Within the lingual epithelium, tight junctions join the apical tips of the gustatory sensory cells in taste buds. These junctions constitute a selective barrier that limits penetration of chemosensory stimuli into taste buds (Michlig et al. J Comp Neurol 502: 1003-1011, 2007). We tested the ability of chemical compounds to permeate into sensory end organs in the lingual epithelium. Our findings reveal a robust barrier that surrounds the entire body of taste buds, not limited to the apical tight junctions. This barrier prevents penetration of many, but not all, compounds, whether they are applied topically, injected into the parenchyma of the tongue, or circulating in the blood supply, into taste buds. Enzymatic treatments indicate that this barrier likely includes glycosaminoglycans, as it was disrupted by chondroitinase but, less effectively, by proteases. The barrier surrounding taste buds could also be disrupted by brief treatment of lingual tissue samples with DMSO. Brief exposure of lingual slices to DMSO did not affect the ability of taste buds within the slice to respond to chemical stimulation. The existence of a highly impermeable barrier surrounding taste buds and methods to break through this barrier may be relevant to basic research and to clinical treatments of taste., (Copyright © 2015 the American Physiological Society.)

Taste buds (sensory structures embedded in oral epithelium) show a remarkable diversity of transmitters synthesized and secreted locally. The known transmitters accumulate in a cell type selective manner, with 5-HT and noradrenaline being limited to presynaptic cells, GABA being synthesized in both presynaptic and glial-like cells, and acetylcholine and ATP used for signalling by receptor cells. Each of these transmitters participates in local negative or positive feedback circuits that target particular cell types. Overall, the role of ATP is the best elucidated. ATP serves as a principal afferent transmitter, and also is the key trigger for autocrine positive feedback and paracrine circuits that result in potentiation (via adenosine) or inhibition (via GABA or 5-HT). While many of the cellular receptors and mechanisms for these circuits are known, their impact on sensory detection and perception remains to be elaborated in most instances. This brief review examines what is known, and some of the open questions and controversies surrounding the transmitters and circuits of the taste periphery., (© 2014 The Authors. The Journal of Physiology © 2014 The Physiological Society.)

The ingestion of dietary protein is of vital importance for the maintenance of fundamental physiological processes. The taste modality umami, with its prototype stimulus, glutamate, is considered to signal the protein content of food. Umami was thought to be mediated by the heterodimeric amino acid receptor, T1R1 + T1R3. Based on knockout studies, additional umami receptors are likely to exist. In addition to amino acids, certain peptides can also elicit and enhance umami taste suggesting that protein breakdown products may contribute to umami taste. The recently deorphanized peptone receptor, GPR92 (also named GPR93; LPAR5), is expressed in gastric enteroendocrine cells where it responds to protein hydrolysates. Therefore, it was of immediate interest to investigate if the receptor GPR92 is expressed in gustatory sensory cells. Using immunohistochemical approaches we found that a large population of cells in murine taste buds was labeled with an GPR92 antibody. A molecular phenotyping of GPR92 cells revealed that the vast majority of GPR92-immunoreactive cells express PLCβ2 and can therefore be classified as type II cells. More detailed analyses have shown that GPR92 is expressed in the majority of T1R1-positive taste cells. These results indicate that umami cells may respond not only to amino acids but also to peptides in protein hydrolysates.

Taste buds are clusters of polarized sensory cells embedded in stratified oral epithelium. In adult mammals, taste buds turn over continuously and are replenished through the birth of new cells in the basal layer of the surrounding non-sensory epithelium. The half-life of cells in mammalian taste buds has been estimated as 8-12 days on average. Yet, earlier studies did not address whether the now well-defined functional taste bud cell types all exhibit the same lifetime. We employed a recently developed thymidine analog, 5-ethynil-2'-deoxyuridine (EdU) to re-evaluate the incorporation of newly born cells into circumvallate taste buds of adult mice. By combining EdU-labeling with immunostaining for selected markers, we tracked the differentiation and lifespan of the constituent cell types of taste buds. EdU was primarily incorporated into basal extragemmal cells, the principal source for replenishing taste bud cells. Undifferentiated EdU-labeled cells began migrating into circumvallate taste buds within 1 day of their birth. Type II (Receptor) taste cells began to differentiate from EdU-labeled precursors beginning 2 days after birth and then were eliminated with a half-life of 8 days. Type III (Presynaptic) taste cells began differentiating after a delay of 3 days after EdU-labeling, and they survived much longer, with a half-life of 22 days. We also scored taste bud cells that belong to neither Type II nor Type III, a heterogeneous group that includes mostly Type I cells, and also undifferentiated or immature cells. A non-linear decay fit described these cells as two sub-populations with half-lives of 8 and 24 days respectively. Our data suggest that many post-mitotic cells may remain quiescent within taste buds before differentiating into mature taste cells. A small number of slow-cycling cells may also exist within the perimeter of the taste bud. Based on their incidence, we hypothesize that these may be progenitors for Type III cells.

Mammalian taste buds use ATP as a neurotransmitter. Taste Receptor (type II) cells secrete ATP via gap junction hemichannels into the narrow extracellular spaces within a taste bud. This ATP excites primary sensory afferent fibers and also stimulates neighboring taste bud cells. Here we show that extracellular ATP is enzymatically degraded to adenosine within mouse vallate taste buds and that this nucleoside acts as an autocrine neuromodulator to selectively enhance sweet taste. In Receptor cells in a lingual slice preparation, Ca(2+) mobilization evoked by focally applied artificial sweeteners was significantly enhanced by adenosine (50 μM). Adenosine had no effect on bitter or umami taste responses, and the nucleoside did not affect Presynaptic (type III) taste cells. We also used biosensor cells to measure transmitter release from isolated taste buds. Adenosine (5 μM) enhanced ATP release evoked by sweet but not bitter taste stimuli. Using single-cell reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR on isolated vallate taste cells, we show that many Receptor cells express the adenosine receptor, Adora2b, while Presynaptic (type III) and Glial-like (type I) cells seldom do. Furthermore, Adora2b receptors are significantly associated with expression of the sweet taste receptor subunit, Tas1r2. Adenosine is generated during taste stimulation mainly by the action of the ecto-5'-nucleotidase, NT5E, and to a lesser extent, prostatic acid phosphatase. Both these ecto-nucleotidases are expressed by Presynaptic cells, as shown by single-cell RT-PCR, enzyme histochemistry, and immunofluorescence. Our findings suggest that ATP released during taste reception is degraded to adenosine to exert positive modulation particularly on sweet taste.

In response to gustatory stimulation, taste bud cells release a transmitter, ATP, that activates P2X2 and P2X3 receptors on gustatory afferent fibers. Taste behavior and gustatory neural responses are largely abolished in mice lacking P2X2 and P2X3 receptors [P2X2 and P2X3 double knock-out (DKO) mice]. The assumption has been that eliminating P2X2 and P2X3 receptors only removes postsynaptic targets but that transmitter secretion in mice is normal. Using functional imaging, ATP biosensor cells, and a cell-free assay for ATP, we tested this assumption. Surprisingly, although gustatory stimulation mobilizes Ca(2+) in taste Receptor (Type II) cells from DKO mice, as from wild-type (WT) mice, taste cells from DKO mice fail to release ATP when stimulated with tastants. ATP release could be elicited by depolarizing DKO Receptor cells with KCl, suggesting that ATP-release machinery remains functional in DKO taste buds. To explore the difference in ATP release across genotypes, we used reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR, immunostaining, and histochemistry for key proteins underlying ATP secretion and degradation: Pannexin1, TRPM5, and NTPDase2 (ecto-ATPase) are indistinguishable between WT and DKO mice. The ultrastructure of contacts between taste cells and nerve fibers is also normal in the DKO mice. Finally, quantitative RT-PCR show that P2X4 and P2X7, potential modulators of ATP secretion, are similarly expressed in taste buds in WT and DKO taste buds. Importantly, we find that P2X2 is expressed in WT taste buds and appears to function as an autocrine, positive feedback signal to amplify taste-evoked ATP secretion.

Taste buds consist of at least three principal cell types that have different functions in processing gustatory signals: glial-like (type I) cells, receptor (type II) cells, and presynaptic (type III) cells. Using a combination of Ca2+ imaging, single-cell reverse transcriptase-PCR and immunostaining, we show that GABA is an inhibitory transmitter in mouse taste buds, acting on GABA(A) and GABA(B) receptors to suppress transmitter (ATP) secretion from receptor cells during taste stimulation. Specifically, receptor cells express GABA(A) receptor subunits β2, δ, and π, as well as GABA(B) receptors. In contrast, presynaptic cells express the GABA(A) β3 subunit and only occasionally GABA(B) receptors. In keeping with the distinct expression pattern of GABA receptors in presynaptic cells, we detected no GABAergic suppression of transmitter release from presynaptic cells. We suggest that GABA may serve function(s) in taste buds in addition to synaptic inhibition. Finally, we also defined the source of GABA in taste buds: GABA is synthesized by GAD65 in type I taste cells as well as by GAD67 in presynaptic (type III) taste cells and is stored in both those two cell types. We conclude that GABA is an inhibitory transmitter released during taste stimulation and possibly also during growth and differentiation of taste buds.

Background: The neuropeptide, oxytocin (OXT), acts on brain circuits to inhibit food intake. Mutant mice lacking OXT (OXT knockout) overconsume salty and sweet (i.e. sucrose, saccharin) solutions. We asked if OXT might also act on taste buds via its receptor, OXTR., Methodology/principal Findings: Using RT-PCR, we detected the expression of OXTR in taste buds throughout the oral cavity, but not in adjacent non-taste lingual epithelium. By immunostaining tissues from OXTR-YFP knock-in mice, we found that OXTR is expressed in a subset of Glial-like (Type I) taste cells, and also in cells on the periphery of taste buds. Single-cell RT-PCR confirmed this cell-type assignment. Using Ca2+ imaging, we observed that physiologically appropriate concentrations of OXT evoked [Ca2+]i mobilization in a subset of taste cells (EC50 approximately 33 nM). OXT-evoked responses were significantly inhibited by the OXTR antagonist, L-371,257. Isolated OXT-responsive taste cells were neither Receptor (Type II) nor Presynaptic (Type III) cells, consistent with our immunofluorescence observations. We also investigated the source of OXT peptide that may act on taste cells. Both RT-PCR and immunostaining suggest that the OXT peptide is not produced in taste buds or in their associated nerves. Finally, we also examined the morphology of taste buds from mice that lack OXTR. Taste buds and their constituent cell types appeared very similar in mice with two, one or no copies of the OXTR gene., Conclusions/significance: We conclude that OXT elicits Ca2+ signals via OXTR in murine taste buds. OXT-responsive cells are most likely a subset of Glial-like (Type I) taste cells. OXT itself is not produced locally in taste tissue and is likely delivered through the circulation. Loss of OXTR does not grossly alter the morphology of any of the cell types contained in taste buds. Instead, we speculate that OXT-responsive Glial-like (Type I) taste bud cells modulate taste signaling and afferent sensory output. Such modulation would complement central pathways of appetite regulation that employ circulating homeostatic and satiety signals.

Cells in taste buds are closely packed, with little extracellular space. Tight junctions and other barriers further limit permeability and may result in buildup of extracellular K(+) following action potentials. In many tissues, inwardly rectifying K channels such as the renal outer medullary K (ROMK) channel (also called Kir1.1 and derived from the Kcnj1 gene) help to redistribute K(+). Using reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), we defined ROMK splice variants in mouse kidney and report here the expression of a single one of these, ROMK2, in a subset of mouse taste cells. With quantitative (q)RT-PCR, we show the abundance of ROMK mRNA in taste buds is vallate > foliate > > palate > > fungiform. ROMK protein follows the same pattern of prevalence as mRNA, and is essentially undetectable by immunohistochemistry in fungiform taste buds. ROMK protein is localized to the apical tips of a subset of taste cells. Using tissues from PLCbeta2-GFP and GAD1-GFP transgenic mice, we show that ROMK is not found in PLCbeta2-expressing type II/receptor cells or in GAD1-expressing type III/presynaptic cells. Instead, ROMK is found, by single-cell RT-PCR and immunofluorescence, in most cells that are positive for the taste glial cell marker, Ectonucleotidase2. ROMK is precisely localized to the apical tips of these cells, at and above apical tight junctions. We propose that in taste buds, ROMK in type I/glial-like cells may serve a homeostatic function, excreting excess K(+) through the apical pore, and allowing excitable taste cells to maintain a hyperpolarized resting membrane potential.

Neuroscientists are now coming to appreciate that a significant degree of information processing occurs in the peripheral sensory organs of taste prior to signals propagating to the brain. Gustatory stimulation causes taste bud cells to secrete neurotransmitters that act on adjacent taste bud cells (paracrine transmitters) as well as on primary sensory afferent fibers (neurocrine transmitters). Paracrine transmission, representing cell-cell communication within the taste bud, has the potential to shape the final signal output that taste buds transmit to the brain. The following paragraphs summarize current thinking about how taste signals generally, and umami taste in particular, are processed in taste buds.

The second messenger, 3',5'-cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP), is known to be modulated in taste buds following exposure to gustatory and other stimuli. Which taste cell type(s) (Type I/glial-like cells, Type II/receptor cells, or Type III/presynaptic cells) undergo taste-evoked changes of cAMP and what the functional consequences of such changes are remain unknown. Using Fura-2 imaging of isolated mouse vallate taste cells, we explored how elevating cAMP alters Ca(2+) levels in identified taste cells. Stimulating taste buds with forskolin (Fsk; 1 microm) + isobutylmethylxanthine (IBMX; 100 microm), which elevates cellular cAMP, triggered Ca(2+) transients in 38% of presynaptic cells (n = 128). We used transgenic GAD-GFP mice to show that cAMP-triggered Ca(2+) responses occur only in the subset of presynaptic cells that lack glutamic acid decarboxylase 67 (GAD). We never observed cAMP-stimulated responses in receptor cells, glial-like cells or GAD-expressing presynaptic cells. The response to cAMP was blocked by the protein kinase A inhibitor H89 and by removing extracellular Ca(2+). Thus, the response to elevated cAMP is a PKA-dependent influx of Ca(2+). This Ca(2+) influx was blocked by nifedipine (an inhibitor of L-type voltage-gated Ca(2+) channels) but was unperturbed by omega-agatoxin IVA and omega-conotoxin GVIA (P/Q-type and N-type channel inhibitors, respectively). Single-cell RT-PCR on functionally identified presynaptic cells from GAD-GFP mice confirmed the pharmacological analyses: Ca(v)1.2 (an L-type subunit) is expressed in cells that display cAMP-triggered Ca(2+) influx, while Ca(v)2.1 (a P/Q subunit) is expressed in all presynaptic cells, and underlies depolarization-triggered Ca(2+) influx. Collectively, these data demonstrate cross-talk between cAMP and Ca(2+) signalling in a subclass of taste cells that form synapses with gustatory fibres and may integrate tastant-evoked signals.

Background: "Type II"/Receptor cells express G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) for sweet, umami (T1Rs and mGluRs) or bitter (T2Rs), as well as the proteins for downstream signalling cascades. Transduction downstream of T1Rs and T2Rs relies on G-protein and PLCbeta2-mediated release of stored Ca2+. Whereas Galphagus (gustducin) couples to the T2R (bitter) receptors, which Galpha-subunit couples to the sweet (T1R2 + T1R3) receptor is presently not known. We utilized RT-PCR, immunocytochemistry and single-cell gene expression profiling to examine the expression of the Galphaq family (q, 11, 14) in mouse taste buds., Results: By RT-PCR, Galpha14 is expressed strongly and in a taste selective manner in posterior (vallate and foliate), but not anterior (fungiform and palate) taste fields. Galphaq and Galpha11, although detectable, are not expressed in a taste-selective fashion. Further, expression of Galpha14 mRNA is limited to Type II/Receptor cells in taste buds. Immunocytochemistry on vallate papillae using a broad Galphaq family antiserum reveals specific staining only in Type II taste cells (i.e. those expressing TrpM5 and PLCbeta2). This staining persists in Galphaq knockout mice and immunostaining with a Galpha11-specific antiserum shows no immunoreactivity in taste buds. Taken together, these data show that Galpha14 is the dominant Galphaq family member detected. Immunoreactivity for Galpha14 strongly correlates with expression of T1R3, the taste receptor subunit present in taste cells responsive to either umami or sweet. Single cell gene expression profiling confirms a tight correlation between the expression of Galpha14 and both T1R2 and T1R3, the receptor combination that forms sweet taste receptors., Conclusion: Galpha14 is co-expressed with the sweet taste receptor in posterior tongue, although not in anterior tongue. Thus, sweet taste transduction may rely on different downstream transduction elements in posterior and anterior taste fields.

The taste-selective G protein, alpha-gustducin (alpha-gus) is homologous to alpha-transducin and activates phosphodiesterase (PDE) in vitro. alpha-Gus-knockout mice are compromized to bitter, sweet and umami taste stimuli, suggesting a central role in taste transduction. Here, we suggest a different role for Galpha-gus. In taste buds of alpha-gus-knockout mice, basal (unstimulated) cAMP levels are high compared to those of wild-type mice. Further, H-89, a cAMP-dependent protein kinase inhibitor, dramatically unmasks responses to the bitter tastant denatonium in gus-lineage cells of knockout mice. We propose that an important role of alpha-gus is to maintain cAMP levels tonically low to ensure adequate Ca2+ signaling.

Although adenosine triphosphate (ATP) is known to be an afferent transmitter in the peripheral taste system, serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) have also been proposed as candidate neurotransmitters and have been detected immunocytochemically in mammalian taste cells. To understand the significance of biogenic amines in taste, we evaluated the ability of taste cells to synthesize, transport, and package 5-HT and NE. We show by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and immunofluorescence microscopy that the enzymes for 5-HT synthesis, tryptophan hydroxylase (TPH) and aromatic amino acid decarboxylase (AADC) are expressed in taste cells. In contrast, enzymes necessary for NE synthesis, tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) and dopamine beta-hydroxylase (DBH) are absent. Both TH and DBH are expressed in nerve fibers that penetrate taste buds. Taste buds also robustly express plasma membrane transporters for 5-HT and NE. Within the taste bud NET, a specific NE transporter, is expressed in some presynaptic (type III) and some glial-like (type I) cells but not in receptor (type II) cells. By using enzyme immunoassay, we show uptake of NE, probably through NET in taste epithelium. Proteins involved in inactivating and packaging NE, including catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), monoamine oxidase-A (MAO-A), vesicular monoamine transporter (VMAT1,2) and chromogranin A (ChrgA), are also expressed in taste buds. Within the taste bud, ChrgA is found only in presynaptic cells and may account for dense-cored vesicles previously seen in some taste cells. In summary, we postulate that aminergic presynaptic taste cells synthesize only 5-HT, whereas NE (perhaps secreted by sympathetic fibers) may be concentrated and repackaged for secretion.

A longstanding question in taste research concerns taste coding and, in particular, how broadly are individual taste bud cells tuned to taste qualities (sweet, bitter, umami, salty, and sour). Taste bud cells express G-protein-coupled receptors for sweet, bitter, or umami tastes but not in combination. However, responses to multiple taste qualities have been recorded in individual taste cells. We and others have shown previously there are two classes of taste bud cells directly involved in gustatory signaling: "receptor" (type II) cells that detect and transduce sweet, bitter, and umami compounds, and "presynaptic" (type III) cells. We hypothesize that receptor cells transmit their signals to presynaptic cells. This communication between taste cells could represent a potential convergence of taste information in the taste bud, resulting in taste cells that would respond broadly to multiple taste stimuli. We tested this hypothesis using calcium imaging in a lingual slice preparation. Here, we show that receptor cells are indeed narrowly tuned: 82% responded to only one taste stimulus. In contrast, presynaptic cells are broadly tuned: 83% responded to two or more different taste qualities. Receptor cells responded to bitter, sweet, or umami stimuli but rarely to sour or salty stimuli. Presynaptic cells responded to all taste qualities, including sour and salty. These data further elaborate functional differences between receptor cells and presynaptic cells, provide strong evidence for communication within the taste bud, and resolve the paradox of broad taste cell tuning despite mutually exclusive receptor expression.

ATP has been shown to be a taste bud afferent transmitter, but the cells responsible for, and the mechanism of, its release have not been identified. Using CHO cells expressing high-affinity neurotransmitter receptors as biosensors, we show that gustatory stimuli cause receptor cells to secrete ATP through pannexin 1 hemichannels in mouse taste buds. ATP further stimulates other taste cells to release a second transmitter, serotonin. These results provide a mechanism to link intracellular Ca(2+) release during taste transduction to secretion of afferent transmitter, ATP, from receptor cells. They also indicate a route for cell-cell communication and signal processing within the taste bud.

We previously showed that rat taste buds express several adenylyl cyclases (ACs) of which only AC8 is known to be stimulated by Ca2+. Here we demonstrate by direct measurements of cAMP levels that AC activity in taste buds is stimulated by treatments that elevate intracellular Ca2+. Specifically, 5 microM thapsigargin or 3 microM A-23187 (calcium ionophore), both of which increase intracellular Ca2+ concentration ([Ca2+]i), lead to a significant elevation of cAMP levels. This calcium stimulation of AC activity requires extracellular Ca2+, suggesting that it is dependent on Ca2+ entry rather than release from stores. With immunofluorescence microscopy, we show that the calcium-stimulated AC8 is principally expressed in taste cells that also express phospholipase Cbeta2 (i.e., cells that elevate [Ca2+]i in response to sweet, bitter, or umami stimuli). Taste transduction for sucrose is known to result in an elevation of both cAMP and calcium in taste buds. Thus we tested whether the cAMP increase in response to sucrose is a downstream consequence of calcium elevation. Even under conditions of depletion of stored and extracellular calcium, the cAMP response to sucrose stimulation persists in taste cells. The cAMP signal in response to monosodium glutamate stimulation is similarly unperturbed by calcium depletion. Our results suggest that tastant-evoked cAMP signals are not simply a secondary consequence of calcium modulation. Instead, cAMP and released Ca2+ may represent independent second messenger signals downstream of taste receptors.

Taste buds are aggregates of 50-100 cells, only a fraction of which express genes for taste receptors and intracellular signaling proteins. We combined functional calcium imaging with single-cell molecular profiling to demonstrate the existence of two distinct cell types in mouse taste buds. Calcium imaging revealed that isolated taste cells responded with a transient elevation of cytoplasmic Ca2+ to either tastants or depolarization with KCl, but never both. Using single-cell reverse transcription (RT)-PCR, we show that individual taste cells express either phospholipase C beta2 (PLCbeta2) (an essential taste transduction effector) or synaptosomal-associated protein 25 (SNAP25) (a key component of calcium-triggered transmitter exocytosis). The two functional classes revealed by calcium imaging mapped onto the two gene expression classes determined by single-cell RT-PCR. Specifically, cells responding to tastants expressed PLCbeta2, whereas cells responding to KCl depolarization expressed SNAP25. We demonstrate this by two methods: first, through sequential calcium imaging and single-cell RT-PCR; second, by performing calcium imaging on taste buds in slices from transgenic mice in which PLCbeta2-expressing taste cells are labeled with green fluorescent protein. To evaluate the significance of the SNAP25-expressing cells, we used RNA amplification from single cells, followed by RT-PCR. We show that SNAP25-positive cells also express typical presynaptic proteins, including a voltage-gated calcium channel (alpha1A), neural cell adhesion molecule, synapsin-II, and the neurotransmitter-synthesizing enzymes glutamic acid decarboxylase and aromatic amino acid decarboxylase. No synaptic markers were detected in PLCbeta2 cells by either amplified RNA profiling or by immunocytochemistry. These data demonstrate the existence of at least two molecularly distinct functional classes of taste cells: receptor cells and synapse-forming cells.

Phospholipase C-type beta2 (PLCbeta2) is expressed in a subset of cells within mammalian taste buds. This enzyme is involved in the transduction of sweet, bitter, and umami stimuli and thus is believed to be a marker for gustatory sensory receptor cells. We have developed transgenic mice expressing green fluorescent protein (GFP) under the control of the PLCbeta2 promoter to enable one to identify these cells and record their physiological activity in living preparations. Expression of GFP (especially in lines with more than one copy integrated) is strong enough to be detected in intact tissue preparations using epifluorescence microscopy. By immunohistochemistry, we confirmed that the overwhelming majority of cells expressing GFP are those that endogenously express PLCbeta2. Expression of the GFP transgene in circumvallate papillae occurs at about the same time during development as endogenous PLCbeta2 expression. When loaded with a calcium-sensitive dye in situ, GFP-positive taste cells produce typical Ca2+ responses to a taste stimulus, the bitter compound cycloheximide. These PLCbeta2 promoter-GFP transgenic lines promise to be useful for studying taste transduction, sensory signal processing, and taste bud development.

A number of gustatory receptors have been proposed to underlie umami, the taste of L-glutamate, and certain other amino acids and nucleotides. However, the response profiles of these cloned receptors have not been validated against responses recorded from taste receptor cells that are the native detectors of umami taste. We investigated umami taste responses in mouse circumvallate taste buds in an intact slice preparation, using confocal calcium imaging. Approximately 5% of taste cells selectively responded to L-glutamate when it was focally applied to the apical chemosensitive tips of receptor cells. The concentration-response range for L-glutamate fell approximately within the physiologically relevant range for taste behavior in mice, namely 10 mm and above. Inosine monophosphate enhanced taste cell responses to L-glutamate, a characteristic feature of umami taste. Using pharmacological agents, ion substitution, and immunostaining, we showed that intracellular pathways downstream of receptor activation involve phospholipase C beta2. Each of the above features matches those predicted by studies of cloned and expressed receptors. However, the ligand specificity of each of the proposed umami receptors [taste metabotropic glutamate receptor 4, truncated metabotropic glutamate receptor 1, or taste receptor 1 (T1R1) and T1R3 dimers], taken alone, did not appear to explain the taste responses observed in mouse taste cells. Furthermore, umami responses were still observed in mutant mice lacking T1R3. A full explanation of umami taste transduction may involve novel combinations of the proposed receptors and/or as-yet-undiscovered taste receptors.

The introduction and expression of exogenous DNA in neurons is valuable for analyzing a range of cellular and molecular processes in the periphery, e.g., the roles of transduction-related proteins, the impact of growth factors on development and differentiation, and the function of promoters specific to cell type. However, sensory receptor cells, particularly chemosensory cells, have been difficult to transfect. We have successfully introduced plasmids expressing green and Discosoma Red fluorescent proteins (GFP and DsRed) into rat taste buds in primary culture. Transfection efficiency increased when delaminated taste epithelium was redigested with fresh protease, suggesting that a protective barrier of extracellular matrix surrounding taste cells may normally be present. Because taste buds are heterogeneous aggregates of cells, we used alpha-gustducin, neuronal cell adhesion molecule (NCAM), and neuronal ubiquitin carboxyl terminal hydrolase (PGP9.5), markers for defined subsets of mature taste cells, to demonstrate that liposome-mediated transfection targets multiple taste cell types. After testing eight commercially available lipids, we identified one, Transfast, that is most effective on taste cells. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of two common "promiscuous" promoters and one promoter that taste cells use endogenously. These studies should permit ex vivo strategies for studying development and cellular function in taste cells., (Copyright (c) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Sour (acid) taste is postulated to result from intracellular acidification that modulates one or more acid-sensitive ion channels in taste receptor cells. The identity of such channel(s) remains uncertain. Potassium channels, by regulating the excitability of taste cells, are candidates for acid transducers. Several 2-pore domain potassium leak conductance channels (K(2)P family) are sensitive to intracellular acidification. We examined their expression in mouse vallate and foliate taste buds using RT-PCR, and detected TWIK-1 and -2, TREK-1 and -2, and TASK-1. Of these, TWIK-1 and TASK-1 were preferentially expressed in taste cells relative to surrounding nonsensory epithelium. The related TRESK channel was not detected, whereas the acid-insensitive TASK-2 was. Using confocal imaging with pH-, Ca(2+)-, and voltage-sensitive dyes, we tested pharmacological agents that are diagnostic for these channels. Riluzole (500 microM), selective for TREK-1 and -2 channels, enhanced acid taste responses. In contrast, halothane (< or = approximately 17 mM), which acts on TREK-1 and TASK-1 channels, blocked acid taste responses. Agents diagnostic for other 2-pore domain and voltage-gated potassium channels (anandamide, 10 microM; Gd(3+), 1 mM; arachidonic acid, 100 microM; quinidine, 200 microM; quinine, 100 mM; 4-AP, 10 mM; and TEA, 1 mM) did not affect acid responses. The expression of 2-pore domain channels and our pharmacological characterization suggest that a matrix of ion channels, including one or more acid-sensitive 2-pore domain K channels, could play a role in sour taste transduction. However, our results do not unambiguously identify any one channel as the acid taste transducer.

The acid-sensitive cation channel acid-sensing ion channel-2 (ASIC2) is widely believed to be a receptor for acid (sour) taste in mammals on the basis of its physiological properties and expression in rat taste bud cells. Using reverse transcriptase-PCR, we detected expression of ASIC1 and ASIC3, but not ASIC4, in mouse and rat taste buds and nonsensory lingual epithelium. Surprisingly, we did not detect mRNA for ASIC2 in mouse taste buds, although we readily observed its expression in rat taste buds. Furthermore, in Ca2+ imaging experiments, ASIC2 knock-out mice exhibited normal physiological responses (increases in intracellular Ca2+ concentrations) to acid taste stimuli. Our results indicate that ASIC2 is not required for acid taste in mice, and that if a universal mammalian acid taste transduction mechanism exists, it likely uses other acid-sensitive receptors or ion channels.

cAMP is a second messenger implicated in sensory transduction for taste. The identity of adenylyl cyclase (AC) in taste cells has not been explored. We have employed RT-PCR to identify the AC isoforms present in taste cells and found that AC 4, 6, and 8 are expressed as mRNAs in taste tissue. These proteins are also expressed in a subset of taste cells as revealed by immunohistochemistry. Alterations of cAMP concentrations are associated with transduction of taste stimuli of several classes. The involvement of particular ACs in this modulation has not been investigated. We demonstrate that glutamate, which is a potent stimulus eliciting a taste quality termed umami, causes a decrease in cAMP in forskolin-treated taste cells. The potentiation of this response by inosine monophosphate, the lack of response to d-glutamate, and the lack of response to umami stimuli in nonsensory lingual epithelium all suggest that the cAMP modulation represents umami taste transduction. Because cAMP downregulation via ACs can be mediated through Galpha(i) proteins, we examined the colocalization of the detected ACs with Galpha(i) proteins and found that 66% of AC8 immunopositive taste cells are also positive for gustducin, a taste-specific Galpha(i) protein. Whether AC8 is directly involved in signal transduction of umami taste remains to be established.

In mammalian taste buds, Type I cells comprise half of all cells. These are termed "glial-like" based on morphologic and molecular features, but there are limited studies describing their function. We tested whether Type I cells sense chemosensory activation of adjacent chemosensory (i.e., Types II and III) taste bud cells, similar to synaptic glia. Using Gad2;;GCaMP3 mice of both sexes, we confirmed by immunostaining that, within taste buds, GCaMP expression is predominantly in Type I cells (with no Type II and ~28% Type III cells expressing weakly). In dissociated taste buds, GCaMP1 Type I cells responded to bath-applied ATP (10-100 μM) but not to 5-HT (transmitters released by Type II or III cells, respectively). Type I cells also did not respond to taste stimuli (5 μM cycloheximide, 1 mM denatonium). In lingual slice preparations also, Type I cells responded to bath-applied ATP (10-100 lM). However, when taste buds in the slice were stimulated with bitter tastants (cycloheximide, denatonium, quinine), Type I cells responded robustly. Taste-evoked responses of Type I cells in the slice preparation were significantly reduced by desensitizing purinoceptors or by purinoceptor antagonists (suramin, PPADS), and were essentially eliminated by blocking synaptic ATP release (carbenoxolone) or degrading extracellular ATP (apyrase). Thus, taste-evoked release of afferent ATP from type II chemosensory cells, in addition to exciting gustatory afferent fibers, also activates glial-like Type I taste cells. We speculate that Type I cells sense chemosensory activation and that they participate in synaptic signaling, similarly to glial cells at CNS tripartite synapses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Taste buds are innervated by neurons whose cell bodies reside in cranial sensory ganglia. Studies on the functional properties and connectivity of these neurons are hindered by the lack of markers to define their molecular identities and classes. The mouse geniculate ganglion contains chemosensory neurons innervating lingual and palatal taste buds and somatosensory neurons innervating the pinna. Here, we report single cell RNA sequencing of geniculate ganglion neurons. Using unbiased transcriptome analyses, we show a pronounced separation between two major clusters which, by anterograde labeling, correspond to gustatory and somatosensory neurons. Among the gustatory neurons, three subclusters are present, each with its own complement of transcription factors and neurotransmitter response profiles. The smallest subcluster expresses both gustatory- and mechanosensoryrelated genes, suggesting a novel type of sensory neuron. We identify several markers to help dissect the functional distinctions among gustatory neurons and address questions regarding target interactions and taste coding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recognition of sweet, bitter and umami tastes requires the non-vesicular release from taste bud cells of ATP, which acts as a neurotransmitter to activate afferent neural gustatory pathways. However, how ATP is released to fulfil this function is not fully understood. Here we show that calcium homeostasis modulator 1 (CALHM1), a voltage-gated ion channel, is indispensable for taste-stimuli-evoked ATP release from sweet-, bitter- and umami-sensing taste bud cells. Calhm1 knockout mice have severely impaired perceptions of sweet, bitter and umami compounds, whereas their recognition of sour and salty tastes remains mostly normal. Calhm1 deficiency affects taste perception without interfering with taste cell development or integrity. CALHM1 is expressed specifically in sweet/bitter/umami-sensing type II taste bud cells. Its heterologous expression induces a novel ATP permeability that releases ATP from cells in response to manipulations that activate the CALHM1 ion channel. Knockout of Calhm1 strongly reduces voltage-gated currents in type II cells and taste-evoked ATP release from taste buds without affecting the excitability of taste cells by taste stimuli. Thus, CALHM1 is a voltage-gated ATP-release channel required for sweet, bitter and umami taste perception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on epidemiological studies on the molecular and physiological basis of sweet taste, which were discussed at the International Symposium on Olfaction and Taste in San Francisco, California, in July 2008. T1R2/T1R3, heterodimeric G protein-coupled receptor, appears to bind to and be activated by most sweet tastants. Speakers in this symposium said that sweet taste may be particularly amenable to perturbation by hormonal and environmental impacts.

The author discusses aspects of taste qualities that focus on the prominence of umami taste stimuli in Eastern cuisines. He explores the chemosensory and molecular analyses demonstrating that the taste bud cells express specific receptors to distinguish glutamate and other umami taste stimuli. The author reveals that umami taste persists in the absence of T1R1 taste receptors.