4.4 Article

Transforming growth factor-β1 downregulates beating frequency and remodeling of cultured rat adult cardiomyocytes

期刊

CELL AND TISSUE RESEARCH
卷 321, 期 1, 页码 57-66

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00441-005-1125-5

关键词

cell culture; growth; underperfusion; proteolysis; protection; cardiomyocytes; rat (Wistar, male)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have observed increased levels of transforming growth factor-beta(1) (TGF-beta(1)) in human hibernating myocardium (HM). Impaired ventricular function in HM is known to be restored to normal following revascularization implying that myocardial structure in HM is to a certain degree preserved. We have therefore tested whether TGF-beta(1) can imitate features of HM by reducing the number and frequency of beating cells (chronotropism) and structural remodeling of cultured adult rat cardiomyocytes (ARC), thus saving substrate, energy, and oxygen. Parameters measured were cell size, protein synthesis, protein degradation, protein content, myofibrillogenesis, and chronotropism. ARC were stimulated for 6 days with sera from patients with coronary heart disease, as this period led to a maximum response of cells. An increase of 90% in cell surface area following such treatment was reduced to a 20% increase of the original size by TGF-beta(1). Concomitantly, the rate of protein synthesis dropped from 3.6-fold to 2.4-fold, and myofibrillogenesis was reduced. TGF-beta(1) downregulated both the number of contracting cells from 81% to 10% and the frequency from 52 to nine beats per minute. However, TGF-beta(1) treatment did not reduce the augmentation of protein content (1.28-fold versus 1.25-fold) indicating that protein degradation was also inhibited. Similar results were obtained with serum from healthy volunters. The effects of TGF-beta(1) were reversible. We conclude that TGF-beta(1) constrains protein turnover and beating activity in underperfused myocardium, thus mediating protection by adapting myocytes to shortages in blood supply.

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

4.4
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