4.5 Article

Muscle type-specific response of HSP60, HSP72, and HSC73 during recovery after elevation of muscle temperature

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 92, Issue 3, Pages 1097-1103

Publisher

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00739.2001

Keywords

heat shock proteins; heat stress; rat; soleus; plantaris

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An original method to induce heat stress was used to clarify the time course of changes in heat shock proteins (HSPs) in rat skeletal muscles during recovery after a single bout of heat stress. One hindlimb was inserted into a stainless steel can and directly heated by raising the air temperature inside the can via a flexible heater twisted around the steel can. Muscle temperature was increased gradually and maintained at 42degreesC for 60 min. Core rectal and contralateral muscle temperatures were increased < 1.5 degrees C during the heat stress. HSP60, HSP72, and heat shock cognate (HSC) 73 content in the slow soleus and fast plantaris in both limbs were determined immediately (0 h) and 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, or 60 h after heat stress. Within 0-4 h, all HSPs were similar to 1.5- to 2.2-fold higher in heat-stressed than contralateral soleus. Compared with the contralateral plantaris, the heat-stressed plantaris had a higher (1.5-fold) HSP60 content immediately and 2 h after heat stress and a higher (2.5- to 6.8-fold) HSP72 content between 24 and 48 h after heat stress. Plantaris HSC73 content was not affected by heat stress. This unique heat-stress method provides advantages over existing systems; muscle temperature can be controlled precisely during heating and the HSP response can be compared between muscles in heat-stressed and contralateral limbs of individual rats. Results show a differential response of HSPs in the soleus and plantaris during recovery after heat stress; soleus demonstrated a more rapid and broader HSP response to heat stress than plantaris.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available