4.6 Article

Endoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ release causes Rieske iron-sulfur protein-mediated mitochondrial ROS generation in pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells

期刊

BIOSCIENCE REPORTS
卷 39, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BSR20192414

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province [LY15H280013]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang [LQ18H070005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (ROS) cause Ca2+ release from the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) via ryanodine receptors (RyRs) in pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells (PASMCs), playing an essential role in hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction (HPV). Here we tested a novel hypothesis that hypoxia-induced RyR-mediated Ca2+ release may, in turn, promote mitochondrial ROS generation contributing to hypoxic cellular responses in PASMCs. Our data reveal that application of caffeine to elevate intracellular Ca2+ concentration ([Ca2+](i)) by activating RyRs results in a significant increase in ROS production in cytosol and mitochondria of PASMCs. Norepinephrine to increase [Ca2+] i due to the opening of inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate receptors (IP3Rs) produces similar effects. Exogenous Ca2+ significantly increases mitochondrial-derived ROS generation as well. Ru360 also inhibits the hypoxic ROS production. The RyR antagonist tetracaine or RyR2 gene knockout (KO) suppresses hypoxia-induced responses as well. Inhibition of mitochondrial Ca2+ uptake with Ru360 eliminates N- and Ca2+-induced responses. RISP KD abolishes the hypoxia-induced ROS production in mitochondria of PASMCs. Rieske iron-sulfur protein (RISP) gene knockdown (KD) blocks caffeine- or NE-induced ROS production. Taken together, these findings have further demonstrated that ER Ca2+ release causes mitochondrial Ca2+ uptake and RISP-mediated ROS production; this novel local ER/mitochondrion communication-elicited, Ca2+-mediated, RISP-dependent ROS production may play a significant role in hypoxic cellular responses in PASMCs.

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