4.7 Article

Diversity in mitochondrial function explains differences in vascular oxygen sensing

期刊

CIRCULATION RESEARCH
卷 90, 期 12, 页码 1307-1315

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.RES.0000024689.07590.C2

关键词

rotenone; K+ channels; redox; pulmonary circulation; oxygen sensor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Renal arteries (RAs) dilate in response to hypoxia, whereas the pulmonary arteries (PAs) constrict. In the PA, O-2 tension is detected by an unidentified redox sensor, which controls K+ channel function and thus smooth muscle cell (SMC) membrane potential and cytosolic calcium. Mitochondria are important regulators of cellular redox status and are candidate vascular O-2 sensors. Mitochondria-derived activated oxygen species (AOS), like H2O2, can diffuse to the cytoplasm and cause vasodilatation by activating sarcolemmal K+ channels. We hypothesize that mitochondrial diversity between vascular beds explains the opposing responses to-hypoxia in PAs versus RAs. The effects of hypoxia and proximal electron transport chain (pETC) inhibitors (rotenone and antimycin A) were compared in rat isolated arteries, vascular SMCs, and perfused organs. Hypoxia and pETC inhibitors decrease production of AOS and outward K+ current and constrict PAs while increasing A:OS production and outward K+ cur-rent and dilating RAs. At baseline, lung mitochondria have lower respiratory rates and higher rates of AOS and H2O2 production. Similarly, production of AOS and H2O2 is greater in PA versus RA rings. SMC mitochondrial membrane potential is more depolarized in PAs versus RAs. These differences relate in part to the lower expression of proximal ETC components and greater expression of mitochondrial manganese superoxide dismutase in PAs versus RAs. Differential regulation of a tonically produced, mitochondria-derived, vasodilating factor, possibly H2O2, can explain the opposing effects of hypoxia on the PAs versus RAs. We conclude that the PA and RA have different mitochondria.

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

4.7
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