4.8 Article

No facilitator required for membrane transport of hydrogen sulfide

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0902952106

关键词

aquaporins; gas transport; membrane permeability; unstirred layer; signaling

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund [FWF W1201-N13]
  2. National Institues of Health [DK43955, DK048217]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) has emerged as a new and important member in the group of gaseous signaling molecules. However, the molecular transport mechanism has not yet been identified. Because of structural similarities with H2O, it was hypothesized that aquaporins may facilitate H2S transport across cell membranes. We tested this hypothesis by reconstituting the archeal aquaporin AfAQP from sulfide reducing bacteria Archaeoglobus fulgidus into planar membranes and by monitoring the resulting facilitation of osmotic water flow and H2S flux. To measure H2O and H2S fluxes, respectively, sodium ion dilution and buffer acidification by proton release (H2S reversible arrow H+ + HS-) were recorded in the immediate membrane vicinity. Both sodium ion concentration and pH were measured by scanning ion-selective microelectrodes. A lower limit of lipid bilayer permeability to H2S, P-M,P-H2S >= 0.5 +/- 0.4 cm/s was calculated by numerically solving the complete system of differential reaction diffusion equations and fitting the theoretical pH distribution to experimental pH profiles. Even though reconstitution of AfAQP significantly increased water permeability through planar lipid bilayers, P-M,P-H2S remained unchanged. These results indicate that lipid membranes may well act as a barrier to water transport although they do not oppose a significant resistance to H2S diffusion. The fact that cholesterol and sphingomyelin reconstitution did not turn these membranes into an H2S barrier indicates that H2S transport through epithelial barriers, endothelial barriers, and membrane rafts also occurs by simple diffusion and does not require facilitation by membrane channels.

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

4.8
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