4.5 Article

Reduction in voltage-gated K+ currents in primary cultured rat pancreatic β-cells by linoleic acids

期刊

ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 147, 期 2, 页码 674-682

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/en.2005-0225

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Free fatty acids (FFAs), in addition to glucose, have been shown to stimulate insulin release through the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) 40 receptor in pancreatic beta-cells. Intracellular free calcium concentration ([Ca2+](i)) in beta-cells is elevated by FFAs, although the mechanism underlying the [Ca2+](i) increase is still unknown. In this study, we investigated the action of linoleic acid on voltage-gated K+ currents. Nystatin-perforated recordings were performed on identified rat beta-cells. In the presence of nifedipine, tetrodotoxin, and tolbutamide, voltage-gated K+ currents were observed. The transient current represents less than 5%, whereas the delayed rectifier current comprises more than 95%, of the total K+ currents. A long-chain unsaturated FFA, linoleic acid (10 mu M), reversibly decreased the amplitude of K+ currents (to less than 10%). This reduction was abolished by the cAMP/protein kinase A system inhibitors H89 (1 mu M) and Rp-cAMP (10 mu M) but was not affected by protein kinase C inhibitor. In addition, forskolin and 8'-bromo-cAMP induced a similar reduction in the K+ current as that evoked by linoleic acid. Insulin secretion and cAMP accumulation in beta-cells were also increased by linoleic acid. Methyl linoleate, which has a similar structure to linoleic acid but no binding affinity to GPR40, did not change K+ currents. Treatment of cultured cells with GPR40-specific small interfering RNA significantly reduced the decrease in K+ current induced by linoleic acid, whereas the cAMP-induced reduction of K+ current was not affected. We conclude that linoleic acid reduces the voltage-gated K+ current in rat beta-cells through GPR40 and the cAMP-protein kinase A system, leading to an increase in [Ca2+](i) and insulin secretion.

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