4.6 Article

Recombinant human ZP3-induced sperm acrosome reaction: Evidence for the involvement of T- and L-type voltage-gated calcium channels

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.04.059

关键词

Acrosome reaction; Ca-v channels; Recombinant human ZP3

资金

  1. NIH [R01 HD03808207A1]
  2. CONACyT-Mexico [49113, 39860, 47011, 99333]
  3. DGAPA/UNAM [IN211809, IN204109]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For successful fertilization mammalian spermatozoa must undergo the acrosome reaction (AR), an exocytotic event that allows this cell to penetrate the outer layer of the oocyte, the zona pellucida (ZP). Four glycoproteins (ZP1-ZP4) compose the human ZP, being ZP3 the physiological inductor of the AR. This process requires changes in intracellular Ca2+. concentration ([Ca2+](i)) involving not fully understood mechanisms. Even in mouse sperm, the pharmacologically documented participation of voltage-gated Ca2+ (Ca-v) channels and store-operated channels (SOCs) in the ZP-induced AR is being debated. The situation in human sperm is even less clear due to the limited availability of human ZP. Here, we used recombinant human ZP3 (rhZP3) produced in baculovirus-infected Sf9 cells to investigate the involvement of Ca-v channels in the human sperm AR. Our findings showed that Ni2+ and mibefradil at concentrations that block T-type or Ca(v)3 channels, and nimodipine and diltiazem that block L-type or Ca(v)1 channels, significantly inhibited the rhZP3-initiated AR. On the other hand, the AR was insensitive to concentrations of omega-Agatoxin IVA, omega-Conotoxin GVIA and SNX-482 that block P/Q N and R-type channels, respectively (Ca(v)2 channels). Our overall findings suggest that Ca(v)1 and Ca(v)3 channels participate in human sperm AR. Consistent with this, we detected in human sperm transcripts for the Ca(v)1 auxiliary subunits, alpha(2)delta, beta(1), beta 2 and beta(4), but not the neuronal specific isoforms beta(3) and gamma(2). (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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