4.7 Article

Glucose-regulated anaplerosis and cataplerosis in pancreatic β-cells -: Possible implication of a pyruvate/citrate shuttle in insulin secretion

期刊

DIABETES
卷 49, 期 5, 页码 718-726

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diabetes.49.5.718

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK50662, DK35914] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hypothesis proposing that anaplerosis and cataplerosis play an important role in fuel signaling by providing mitochondrially derived coupling factors for stimulation of insulin secretion was tested. A rise in citrate coincided with the initiation of insulin secretion in response to glucose in INS-1 beta-cells. The dose dependence of glucose-stimulated insulin release correlated closely with those of the cellular contents of citrate, malate, and citrate-derived malonyl-CoA.. The glucose-induced elevations in citrate, alpha-ketoglutarate, malonyl-CoA, and the 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium reduction state, an index of beta-cell metabolic activity, were unaffected by the Ca2+ chelator EGTA. Glucose induced a rise in both mitochondrial and cytosolic citrate and promoted efflux of citrate from the cells. The latter amounted to similar to 20% of glucose carbons entering the glycolytic pathway Phenylacetic acid, a pyruvate carboxylase inhibitor, reduced the glucose-induced rise in citrate in INS-1 cells and insulin secretion in both INS-1 cells and rat islets. The results indicate the feasibility of a pyruvate/citrate shuttle in INS-1 beta-cells, allowing the regeneration of NAD(+) in the cytosol and the formation of cytosolic acetyl-CoA, malonyl-30A, and NADPH. The data suggest that anaplerosis and cataplerosis are early signaling events in beta-cell activation that do not require a rise in Ca2+. It is proposed that citrate is a signal of fuel abundance that contributes to beta-cell activation in both the mitochondrial and cytosolic compartments and that a major fate of anaplerotic glucose carbons is external citrate.

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