Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 158, Issue 3, pp 298–300 | Cite as

Role of Cholesterol in the Maintenance of Endplate Electrogenesis in Rat Diaphragm

  • V. V. Kravtsova
  • A. M. Petrov
  • A. N. Vasil’ev
  • A. L. Zefirov
  • I. I. Krivoi
Article

Methyl-β-cyclodextrin (0.1 mM) reduced resting potential of muscle fibers and abolished local endplate membrane hyperpolarization in rat diaphragm. This effect was associated with selective reduction of electrogenic activity of α2-isoform of Na,K-ATPase without changes in the level of intracellular acetylcholine. Experiments with cholesterol marker filipin showed that methyl-β-cyclodextrin in this dose induced cholesterol translocation from lipid rafts to liquid phase of the membrane without its release into extracellular space. This modification of lipid rafts by methyl-β-cyclodextrin presumably impaired the mechanism maintaining electrogenesis in endplates mediated by modulation of Na,K-ATPase by non-quantum acetylcholine. Cholesterol can serve as a molecular component of this mechanism.

Key Words

cholesterol lipid rafts Na,K-ATPase acetylcholine 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. L. Zefirov and A. M. Petrov, Ross. Fiziol. Zh., 96, No. 8, 753–765 (2010).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. M. Petrov and A. L. Zefirov, Uspekhi Fiziol. Nauk, 44, No. 1, 17–38 (2013).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Brannigan, J. Henin, R. Law, et al., Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 105, No. 38, 14,418-14,423 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Chen, X. Li, Q. Ye, et al., J. Biol. Chem., 286, No. 17, 15,517-15,524 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. V. Chibalin, J. A. Heiny, B. Benziane, et al., PLoS One, 7, No. 3, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033719 (2012).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. A. Heiny, V. V. Kravtsova, F. Mandel, et al., J. Biol. Chem., 285, No. 37, 28,614-28,626 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    I. I. Krivoi, T. M. Drabkina, V. V. Kravtsova, et al., Pflugers. Arch., 452, No. 6, 756–765 (2006).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Lingwood and K. Simons, Science, 327, 46–50 (2010).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    E. E. Nikolsky, H. Zemkova, V. A. Voronin, and F. Vyskocil, J. Physiol., 477, Pt. 3, 497–502 (1994).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. A. Orlandi, and P. H. Fishman, J. Cell. Biol., 141, No. 4, 905–915 (1998).PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. M. Petrov, N. V. Naumenko, K. V. Uzinskaya, et al., Neuroscience, 186, 1–12 (2011).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. L. Ruff, Muscle Nerve, 44, No. 6, 854–861 (2011).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. M. Sebastiao, M. Colino-Oliveira, N. Assaife-Lopes, et al., Neuropharmacology, 64, 97–107 (2013).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Zhu, W. C. Xiong, and L. Mei, J. Neurosci., 26, No. 18, 4841–4851 (2006).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. Zidovetzki and I. Levitan, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1768, No. 6, 1311–1324 (2007).PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. V. Kravtsova
    • 1
  • A. M. Petrov
    • 2
  • A. N. Vasil’ev
    • 1
  • A. L. Zefirov
    • 2
  • I. I. Krivoi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General PhysiologySt. Petersburg State UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia
  2. 2.Department of Normal PhysiologyKazan State Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian FederationKazanRussia

Personalised recommendations