4.5 Article

Inhibition of mitochondrial respiration by nitric oxide rapidly stimulates cytoprotective GLUT3-mediated glucose uptake through 5′-AMP-activated protein kinase

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 384, 期 -, 页码 629-636

出版社

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BJ20040886

关键词

5 '-AMP-activated protein kinase (AMP kinase); cytoprotection; glucose uptake; glycolysis; mitochondria; nitric oxide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently, we have reported that the inhibition of mitochondrial respiration by nitric oxide (NO) leads to an up-regulation of glycolysis and affords cytoprotection against energy failure through the stimulation of AMPK (5'-AMP-activated protein kinase) [Almeida, Moncada and Bolanos (2004) Nat. Cell Biol. 6, 45-51]. To determine whether glucose transport contributes specifically to this effect, we have now investigated the possible role of NO in modulating glucose uptake through GLUT3, a facilitative high-affinity glucose carrier that has been suggested to afford cytoprotection against hypoglyeaemic episodes. To do so, GLUT3-lacking HEK-293T cells (human embryonic kidney 293T cells) were transformed to express a plasmid construction encoding green fluorescent protein-tagged GLUT3 cDNA. This carrier was preferentially localized to the plasma membrane, was seen to be functionally active and afforded cytoprotection against low glucose-induced apoptotic death. Inhibition of mitochondrial respiration by NO triggered a rapid, cGMP-independent enhancement of GLUT3-mediated glucose uptake through a mechanism that did not involve transporter translocation. Furthermore, the functional disruption of AMPK by the RNA interference strategy rendered cells unable to respond to NO by activating GLUT3-mediated glucose uptake. These results suggest that the inhibition of mitochondrial respiration by NO activates AMPK to stimulate glucose uptake, thereby representing a novel survival pathway during pathophysiological conditions involving transient reductions in the supply of cellular glucose.

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