4.6 Article

The Effects of Neuregulin on Cardiac Myosin Light Chain Kinase Gene-Ablated Hearts

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066720

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL080536, HL026043, HL007360-31]
  2. Moss Heart Fund
  3. Fouad A. and Val Imm Bashour Distinguished Chair in Physiology
  4. American Heart Association
  5. American Diabetes Association Mentor-Based Postdoctoral Fellowship [7-08-MN-21-ADA]
  6. [HL-075173]
  7. [HL-080144]
  8. [HL-090842]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Activation of ErbB2/4 receptor tyrosine kinases in cardiomyocytes by neuregulin treatment is associated with improvement in cardiac function, supporting its use in human patients with heart failure despite the lack of a specific mechanism. Neuregulin infusion in rodents increases cardiac myosin light chain kinase (cMLCK) expression and cardiac myosin regulatory light chain (RLC) phosphorylation which may improve actin-myosin interactions for contraction. We generated a cMLCK knockout mouse to test the hypothesis that cMLCK is necessary for neuregulin-induced improvement in cardiac function by increasing RLC phosphorylation. Principal Findings: The cMLCK knockout mice have attenuated RLC phosphorylation and decreased cardiac performance measured as fractional shortening. Neuregulin infusion for seven days in wildtype mice increased cardiac cMLCK protein expression and RLC phosphorylation while increasing Akt phosphorylation and decreasing phospholamban phosphorylation. There was no change in fractional shortening. In contrast, neuregulin infusion in cMLCK knockout animals increased cardiac performance in the absence of cMLCK without increasing RLC phosphorylation. In addition, CaMKII signaling appeared to be enhanced in neuregulin-treated knockout mice. Conclusions: Thus, Neuregulin may improve cardiac performance in the failing heart without increasing cMLCK and RLC phosphorylation by activating other signaling pathways.

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