4.5 Article

Loss of metabotropic glutamate receptor-mediated regulation of glutamate transport in chemically activated astrocytes in a rat model of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROCHEMISTRY
卷 96, 期 3, 页码 719-731

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-4159.2005.03577.x

关键词

activated astrocytes; amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; gliosis; glutamate transporter 1; metabotropic glutamate receptor 5; regulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by a selective loss of motor neurones accompanied by intense gliosis in lesioned areas of the brain and spinal cord. Glutamate-mediated excitotoxicity resulting from impaired astroglial uptake constitutes one of the current pathophysiological hypotheses explaining the progression of the disease. In this study, we examined the regulation of glutamate transporters by type 5 metabotropic glutamate receptor (mGluR5) in activated astrocytes derived from transgenic rats carrying an ALS-related mutated human superoxide dismutase 1 (hSOD1(G93A)) transgene. Cells from transgenic animals and wild-type littermates showed similar expression of glutamate-aspartate transporter and glutamate transporter 1 (GLT-1) after in vitro activation, whereas cells carrying the hSOD1 mutation showed a three-fold higher expression of functional mGluR5, as observed in the spinal cord of end-stage animals. In cells from wild-type animals, (S)-3,5-dihydroxyphenylglycine (DHPG) caused an immediate protein kinase C (PKC)-dependent up-regulation of aspartate uptake that reflected the activation of GLT-1. Although this effect was mimicked in both cultures by direct activation of PKC using phorbol myristate acetate, DHPG failed to up-regulate aspartate uptake in cells derived from the transgenic rats. The failure of activated mGluR5 to increase glutamate uptake in astrocytes derived from this animal model of ALS supports the theory of glutamate excitotoxicity in the pathogenesis of the disease.

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