4.6 Article

Glucose Suppression of Glucagon Secretion METABOLIC AND CALCIUM RESPONSES FROM α-CELLS IN INTACT MOUSE PANCREATIC ISLETS

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 285, 期 19, 页码 14389-14398

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M109.069195

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DK53434, GM72048, RR25649]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glucagon is released from alpha-cells present in intact pancreatic islets at glucose concentrations below 4 mM, whereas higher glucose levels inhibit its secretion. The mechanisms underlying the suppression of alpha-cell secretory activity are poorly understood, but two general types of models have been proposed as follows: direct inhibition by glucose or paracrine inhibition from non-alpha-cells within the islet of Langerhans. To identify alpha-cells for analysis, we utilized transgenic mice expressing fluorescent proteins targeted specifically to these cells. Measurements of glucagon secretion from pure populations of flow-sorted alpha-cells show that contrary to its effect on intact islets, glucose does stimulate glucagon secretion from isolated alpha-cells. This observation argues against a direct inhibition of glucagon secretion by glucose and supports the paracrine inhibition model. Imaging of cellular metabolism by two-photon excitation of NAD(P) H autofluorescence indicates that glucose is metabolized in alpha-cells and that glucokinase is the likely rate-limiting step in this process. Imaging calcium dynamics of alpha-cells in intact islets reveals that inhibiting concentrations of glucose increase the intracellular calcium concentration and the frequency of alpha-cell calcium oscillations. Application of candidate paracrine inhibitors leads to reduced glucagon secretion but did not decrease the alpha-cell calcium activity. Taken together, the data suggest that suppression occurs downstream from alpha-cell calcium signaling, presumably at the level of vesicle trafficking or exocytotic machinery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据