Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 140, Issue 3, pp 285–288 | Cite as

Proteinase-Activated Type 1 Receptors are Involved in the Mechanism of Protection of Rat Hippocampal Neurons from Glutamate Toxicity

  • L. R. Gorbacheva
  • T. P. Storozhevykh
  • E. V. Kiseleva
  • V. G. Pinelis
  • S. M. Strukova
Article
Received:

Abstract

Survival of cultured rat hippocampal neurons was estimated 4, 24, and 48 h after 15-min exposure to the toxic effect of glutamate under conditions of pre- or coincubation with 10 nM thrombin. Thrombin inhibited glutamate-induced apoptosis in neurons 24 and 48 h after treatment, but had no effect on necrosis. Selective peptide agonist of proteinase-activated type 1 receptors simulated, but receptor antagonist suppressed the neuroprotective effect of thrombin. Our results suggest that peptide antagonist of type 1 receptors play a role in the mechanisms of neuronal protection from glutamate toxicity.

Key Words

brain neurotoxicity glutamate thrombin proteinase-activated type 1 receptors 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    E. V. Kiseleva, T. P. Storozhevykh, V. G. Pinelis, et al., Byull. Eksp. Biol. Med., 134, No.5, 519–523 (2004).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. M. Strukova, Biokhimiya, 66, No.1, 14–27 (2001).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    B. I. Khodorov, T. P. Storozhevykh, A. M. Surin, et al., Biologicheskie Membrany, 18, No.6, 419–430 (2001).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Danysz and C. Parsons, Pharmacol. Rev., 50, No.4, 597–664 (1998).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. M. Donovan, C. J. Pike, C. W. Cotman, and D. D. Cunningham, J. Neurosci., 17, No.14, 5316–5326 (1997).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. N. Flynn and A. G. Buret, Apoptosis, 9, No.6, 729–737 (2001).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. R. Hynd, H. L. Scott, and P. R. Dodd, Neurochem. Int., 45, No.5, 583–595 (2004).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Marcaida, E. Kosenko, M.-D. Minana, et al., J. Neurochem., 66, 99–104 (1996).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Masada, G. Xi, Y. Hua, and R. F. Keep, Brain Res., 67, 173–179 (2000).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Montoliu, M. Llansola, C. Cucarella, et al., J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., 281, No.2, 643–647 (1997).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. P. Niclou, H. S. Suidan, A. Pavlik, et al., Eur. J. Neurosci., 10, No.5, 1590–1607 (1998).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Y. Shikamoto and T. Morita, FEBS Lett., 463, 387–389 (1999).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    F. Striggow, M. Riek, P. Henrich-Noack, et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 9, 2264–2269 (2000).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    V. L. Turgeon, C. E. Milligan, and L. J. Houenou, J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol., 58, No.5, 499–504 (1999).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. Xi, R. F. Keep, Y. Hua, et al., Stroke, 30, 1247–1255 (1999).PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. R. Gorbacheva
    • 2
  • T. P. Storozhevykh
    • 1
  • E. V. Kiseleva
    • 2
  • V. G. Pinelis
    • 1
  • S. M. Strukova
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratory of Membranology, Research Center of Child HealthRussian Academy of Medical SciencesRussia
  2. 2.Department of Human and Animal Physiology, Biological FacultyM. V. Lomonosov Moscow State UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations