4.6 Article

Tl(I) and Tl(III) activate both mitochondrial and extrinsic pathways of apoptosis in rat pheochromocytoma (PC12) cells

期刊

TOXICOLOGY AND APPLIED PHARMACOLOGY
卷 236, 期 1, 页码 59-70

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2008.12.029

关键词

Thallium; Cytochrome c; Apoptosis; Caspase; Apoptosis inducing factor; Toxicology

资金

  1. University of Buenos Aires [B072]
  2. CONICET [5536]
  3. ANPCyT, Argentina [32273]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thallium (Tl) is a highly toxic metal though yet its mechanisms are poorly understood. Previously, we demonstrated that rat pheochromocytoma (PC12) cells exposure to thallous (Tl(I)) or thallic (Tl(III)) cations leads to mitochondrial damage and reduced cell viability. In the present work we comparatively characterized the possible pathways involved in Tl(I)- and Tl(III)- (10-100 mu M) mediated decrease in PC12 cells viability. We observed that these cations do not Cause cell necrosis but significantly increased the number of cells with apoptotic features. Both cations lead to Bax oligomerization and caused apoptosis inducing factor (AIF), endonuclease G (Endo G), and cytochrome c release from mitochondria, but they did not activate caspase dependent DNAse (CAD). Tl(I)- and Tl(III)-dependent caspases 9 and 3 activation followed similar kinetics, with maximal effects at 18 h of incubation. In addition, Tl(I) promoted phosphatidylserine (PS) exposure. Tl(III) induced 2- and 18-fold increase in Fas content and caspase 8 activity, respectively. Together, experimental results show that Tl(I) and Tl(III) induce PC12 cells apoptosis, although differential pathways are involved. While Tl(I)-mediated cell apoptosis was mainly associated with mitochondrial damage, Tl(III) showed a mixed effect triggering both the intrinsic and extrinsic pathways of apoptosis. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying Tl-induced loss of cell viability in PC12 cells. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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