ArticleThe Journal of physiology2001
Rapid acid extrusion response triggered by alpha(1) adrenoceptor in CHO cells.
Article in The Journal of physiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
1. Using a microphysiometer with synchronized valve switching, we investigated real-time acid extrusion from Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells in which human alpha(1) adrenoceptor (AR) is stably expressed, in response to noradrenaline (NA). 2. In the cells expressing alpha(1a) AR, the time course of extracellular acidification after stimulation had two phases; in the first phase it transiently reached a rate several times greater than the base rate with a peak at around 10 s, and in the second it increased to 2 times the base rate and reached a plateau in 2 min. Both phases showed a concentration-dependent increase of acidification rate in response to NA, but had distinct pEC(50) values; 5.6 for the transient phase and 7.2 for the steady phase. 3. In the cells expressing alpha(1b) AR, the transient phase was not detected but the steady phase was observed. The pEC(50) value was 7.1, although the magnitude of the response was much smaller than that with alpha(1a) AR. 4. Both 5-(N-ethyl-N-isopropyl)amiloride (EIPA) and HOE642 inhibited the acid extrusion response by either AR in a concentration-dependent manner. EIPA and HOE642 had high pIC(50) values (7.4 and 7.3, respectively) for inhibition of the transient phase response via alpha(1a) AR. In the inhibition of the steady phase response via alpha(1a) AR, both drugs revealed the presence of two components in the response; one had high pIC(50) values (8.1 and 8.2 for EIPA and HOE642, respectively) and the other had low pIC(50) values (5.6 and 6.0, respectively). In contrast, the steady phase response via alpha(1b) AR was inhibited by EIPA and HOE642 with low pIC(50) values (5.3 and 5.9, respectively). 5. As Ca2+ was depleted, the alpha(1a) AR-induced transient phase disappeared, while the steady phase was not affected. 6. These results suggest that alpha(1a) AR drives two acid extrusion systems in CHO cells upon stimulation; one elicits the transient response, which is largely mediated by an EIPA/HOE642-sensitive and Ca(2+)-dependent Na(+)-H(+) exchanger (NHE), presumably NHE1, and the other induces the steady acid extrusion that is mediated by NHE1 and another NHE which has low sensitivity to both EIPA and HOE642. alpha(1b) AR drives only the steady phase acid extrusion response, which is mainly mediated by NHEs other than NHE1.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.