4.7 Article

Implication of CO inactivation on myoglobin function

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-CELL PHYSIOLOGY
卷 290, 期 6, 页码 C1616-C1624

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpcell.00360.2005

关键词

nuclear magnetic resonance; respiration; carbon monoxide; myocardium; oxidative phosphorylation

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM-58688] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Myoglobin (Mb) has a purported role in facilitating O-2 diffusion in tissue, especially as cellular Po-2 drops or the respiration demand increases. Inhibiting Mb with CO under conditions that accentuate the facilitated diffusion role should then elicit a significant physiological response. In one set of experiments, the perfused myocardium received buffer with decreasing Po-2 (225, 129, and 64 mmHg). Intracellular Po-2 declined, as reflected in the H-1 NMR Val E11 signal of MbO(2) (67%, 32%, and 18%). The addition of 6% CO further reduced the available MbO2 (11%, 9%, and 7%), as evidenced by the decline of the MbO2 Val E11 signal intensity at -2.76 ppm. In a second set of experiments, electrical stimulation increased the heart rate (300, 450, and 540 beats/min) and correspondingly the O-2 consumption rate (MVo(2)). Intracellular Po-2 also declined, as reflected in the slight drop in the MbO2 signal (100%, 96%, and 82%). MVo(2) increased ( 100%, 114%, 165%). The addition of 3% CO in the stimulated hearts further decreased the available Mbo(2) (46%, 44%, and 29%). In all cases, CO inactivation of Mb does not induce any change in the respiration rate, contractile function, and high-energy phosphate levels. Moreover, the MbCO/MbO(2) partition coefficient shifts dramatically from its in vitro value during hypoxia and increased work. The observation suggests a modulation of an intracellular O-2 gradient. Overall, the experimental observations provide no evidence of a facilitated diffusion role for Mb in perfused myocardium and implicate a physiologically responsive intracellular O-2 gradient.

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

4.7
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