4.5 Article

P2X7 Receptor Activates Multiple Selective Dye-Permeation Pathways in RAW 264.7 and Human Embryonic Kidney 293 Cells

期刊

MOLECULAR PHARMACOLOGY
卷 76, 期 6, 页码 1323-1332

出版社

AMER SOC PHARMACOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
DOI: 10.1124/mol.109.059923

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ankara University [BAP-2006 0809 232]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P2X7 receptor has gained an increasing importance as a drug target. One important response to P2X7 receptor stimulation is the uptake of large molecular weight tracers into cells. However, mechanism for this response is not understood clearly, but it is generally believed that a nonselective large pore protein forms this P2X7 receptor-activated permeability pathway. We examined human embryonic kidney (HEK) 293 cells transfected with rat P2X7 receptors (HEK-rP2X7) and a macrophage derived cell line, RAW 264.7, that expresses an endogenous P2X7 receptor. We used confocal microscopy to investigate uptake of different types of dyes into these cells after ATP application. Stimulation of P2X7 receptors in HEK-rP2X7 cells activated two different dye uptake pathways. The first was permeable to the cationic fluorescent dyes YO-PRO-1 and TO-TO-1 but not to the anionic dyes lucifer yellow and calcein and did not require intracellular Ca2+ concentration ([Ca2+](i)) increase to be activated. The second pathway permeated only lucifer yellow and was completely dependent on [Ca2+](i) for activation. In RAW 264.7 cells, P2X7 receptor stimulation activated uptake of ethidium, YO-PRO-1, TO-TO-1, lucifer yellow, and calcein. Again, two different permeation pathways were discerned in RAW 264.7 cells: one permeated only ethidium and the other one, only lucifer yellow. We did observed no clear [Ca2+](i) dependence for these permeation pathways. Our results demonstrate that instead of a single nonselective pore, P2X7 receptor seems to activate at least two permeation pathways, one for cationic and one for anionic dyes with different activation properties.

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