4.6 Article

Laminar shear flow increases hydrogen sulfide and activates a nitric oxide producing signaling cascade in endothelial cells

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.07.115

关键词

Shear flow; Hydrogen sulfide; Nitric oxide; 3-Mercapto-sulfurtransferase; NBD-SCN; Endothelial cell

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan [NSC102-2320-B-320-010]
  2. Kaohsiung Medical University Aim for the Top Universities Grant [KMU-TP103C00, KMU-TP103E00, KMU-O104003]
  3. Ten Chan General Hospital, Chung-Li and KMU Joint Research Project [ST102004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laminar shear flow triggers a signaling cascade that maintains the integrity of endothelial cells (ECs). Hydrogen sulfide (H2S), a new gasotransmitter is regarded as an upstream regulator of nitric oxide (NO). Whether the H2S-generating enzymes are correlated to the enzymes involved in NO production under shear flow conditions remains unclear as yet. In the present study, the cultured ECs were subjected to a constant shear flow (12 dyn/cm(2)) in a parallel flow chamber system. We investigated the expression of three key enzymes for H2S biosynthesis, cystathionine-gamma-Iyase (CSE), cystathionine-beta-synthase (CBS), and 3-mercapto-sulfurtransferase (3-MST). Shear flow markedly increased the level of 3-MST. Shear flow enhanced the production of H2S was determined by NBD-SCN reagent that can bind to cysteine/homocystein. Exogenous treatment of NaHS that can release gaseous H2S, ECs showed an increase of phosphorylation in Akt(S473), ERKT202/Y204 and eNOS(S1177). This indicated that H2S can trigger the NO-production signaling cascade. Silencing of CSE, CBS and 3-MST genes by siRNA separately attenuated the phosphorylation levels of Akt(S423) and eNOS(S1177) under shear flow conditions. The particular mode of shear flow increased H2S production. The interplay between H2S and NO-generating enzymes were discussed in the present study. (C) 2015 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