4.8 Article

Aldosterone acts via an ATP autocrine/paracrine system:: The Edelman ATP hypothesis revisited

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0507008102

关键词

scanning ion conductance microscopy; scanning probe microscopy; epithelial sodium channel; renal epithelium

资金

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [C19021] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [C19021] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aldosterone, the most important sodium-retaining hormone, was first characterized >50 years ago. However, despite numerous studies including the classical work of Isidore S. Izzy Edelman showing that aldosterone action depended on ATP production, the mechanism by which it activates sodium reabsorption via the epithelial sodium channel remains unclear. Here, we report experiments that suggest that one of the key steps in aldosterone action is via an autocrine/paracrine system. The hormone stimulates ATP release from the basolateral side of the target kidney cell. Prevention of ATP accumulation or its removal blocks aldosterone action. ATP then acts via a purinergic mechanism to produce contraction of small groups of adjacent epithelial cells. Patch clamping demonstrates that it is these contracted cells that have channel activity. With progressive recruitment of contracting cells, there is then a parallel increase in transepithelial electrical conductance. In common with other stimuli of sodium transport, this pathway involves phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase. Inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase blocks both cell contraction and conductance. We put forward the hypothesis that redistribution of the cell volume caused by the lateral contraction results in apical swelling and that this change, in turn, disrupts the epithelial sodium channel interaction with the F-actin cytoskeleton, opening the channel and hence increasing sodium transport.

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

4.8
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