4.5 Article

Regulation of HSP25 expression and phosphorylation in functionally overloaded rat plantaris and soleus muscles

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 100, 期 2, 页码 451-456

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01022.2005

关键词

heat shock protein 25; functional overload

资金

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [R03 AR049855-01A1, R03 AR-049855, R03 AR049855] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Functional overload (FO) is a powerful inducer of muscle hypertrophy and both oxidative and mechanical stress in muscle fibers. Heat shock protein 25 (HSP25) may protect against both of these stressors, and its expression can be regulated by changes in muscle loading and activation. The primary purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that chronic FO increases HSP25 expression and phosphorylation (pHSP25) in hypertrophying rat hindlimb muscle. HSP25 and pHSP25 levels were quantified in soluble and insoluble fractions of the soleus and plantaris to determine whether 3 or 7 days of FO increase translocation of HSP25 and/or pHSP25 to the insoluble fraction. p38 protein and phosphorylation (p-p38) was measured to determine its association with changes in pHSP25. HSP25 mRNA showed time-dependent increases in both the soleus and plantaris with FO. Three or seven days of FO increased HSP25 and pHSP25 in the soluble fraction in both muscles, with a greater response in the plantaris. In the insoluble fraction, HSP25 was increased after 3 or 7 days in both muscles, whereas pHSP25 was only increased in the 7-day plantaris. p38 and p-p38 increased in the plantaris at both time points. In the soleus, p-p38 only increased after 7 days. These results show that FO is associated with changes in HSP25 expression and phosphorylation and suggest its role in the remodeling that occurs during muscle hypertrophy. Increases in HSP25 in the insoluble fraction suggest that it may help to stabilize actin and/or other cytoskeletal proteins during the stress of muscle remodeling.

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