4.5 Article

Mechanisms of glutamate release elicited in rat cerebrocortical nerve endings by 'pathologically' elevated extraterminal K+ concentrations

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROCHEMISTRY
卷 103, 期 3, 页码 952-961

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2007.04784.x

关键词

Ca2+ pools; carrier-mediated release; excitatory amino acid transporters; exocytosis; glutamate release; pathological [K plus ]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extracellular [K+] can increase during some pathological conditions, resulting into excessive glutamate release through multiple mechanisms. We here investigate the overflow of [H-3] D- aspartate ([H-3] D-ASP) and of endogenous glutamate elicited by increasing [K+] from purified rat cerebrocortical synaptosomes. Depolarization with [K+] <= 15 mmol/L provoked [ 3 H] D- ASP and glutamate overflows almost totally dependent on external Ca2+. Consistent with release by exocytosis, the overflow of [H-3] D-ASP evoked by 12 mmol/L K+ was sensitive to clostridial toxins. The overflows evoked by 35/50 mmol/L K+ remained external Ca2+-dependent by more than 50%. The Ca2+-independent components of the [H-3] DASP overflows evoked by [K+] > 15 mmol/L were prevented by the glutamate transporter inhibitors DL-threo-beta-benzyloxyaspartate (DL-TBOA) and dihydrokainate. Differently, the overflows of endogenous glutamate provoked by K+] > 15 mmol/L were insensitive to both inhibitors; the external Ca2+-independent glutamate overflow caused by 50 mmol/L KCl was prevented by bafilomycin, by chelating intraterminal Ca2+, by blocking the mitochondrial Na+/Ca2+ exchanger and, for a small portion, by blocking anion channels. In contrast to purified synaptosomes, the 50 mmol/L K+-evoked release of endogenous glutamate or [H-3] D-ASP was inhibited by DL-TBOA in crude synaptosomes; moreover, it was external Ca2+-insensitive and blocked by DL-TBOA in purified gliosomes, suggesting that carrier-mediated release of endogenous glutamate provoked by excessive [K+] in CNS tissues largely originates from glia.

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

4.5
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