4.5 Article

A static pressure sensitive receptor APJ promote H9c2 cardiomyocyte hypertrophy via PI3K-autophagy pathway

期刊

ACTA BIOCHIMICA ET BIOPHYSICA SINICA
卷 46, 期 8, 页码 699-708

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/abbs/gmu046

关键词

apelin; static pressure; APJ; hypertrophy; PI3K; autophagy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81270420, 30901577]
  2. Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry [20091590]
  3. Heng Yang Joint Funds of Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [12JJ8013]
  4. Open Fund Project of Key Laboratory in Hunan Universities [10K051]
  5. Construct Program of the Key Discipline in Hunan Province

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study is designed to investigate whether APJ receptor acts as a sensor in static pressure-induced cardiomyocyte hypertrophy and to investigate the mechanism of PI3K-autophagy pathway. The left ventricular hypertrophy rat model was established by coarctation of abdominal aorta. H9c2 rat cardiomyocytes were cultured in the presence of static pressure which was given by a custom-made pressure incubator. The results revealed that the expression of apelin/APJ system, PI3K, Akt and their phosphorylation were significantly increased in the operation group. Static pressure up-regulated the APJ expression, PI3K phosphorylation, Akt phosphorylation, LC3-II/I and beclin-1 expression in cardiomyocytes. APJ shRNA pGPU6/Neo-rat-399, PI3K inhibitor LY294002, Akt inhibitor 1701-1 blocked the up-regulation of APJ, PI3K phosphorylation, Akt phosphorylation, LC3-II/I and beclin-1 expression, respectively. Moreover, static pressure increased the diameter, volume, protein content of cells, and these could be reversed when the cells were treated with pGPU6/Neo-rat-399, LY294002, and autophagy inhibitor 3-methyladenine, respectively. These results suggested that static pressure up-regulates APJ expression to promote cardiomyocyte hypertrophy by a PI3K-autophagy pathway.

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