Endocytosis pp 239-245 | Cite as

Receptor-Mediated Endocytosis in Liver Endothelial Cells. Evidence of Lysosomal Heterogeneity

  • T. Berg
  • S. Magnusson
  • E. Stang
  • N. Roos
Conference paper
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 62)


Hepatic lysosomal heterogeneity is partly due to differences between lysosomes in the different types of liver cells. It has been shown, for instance, that the composition and contents of various lysosomal enzyme activities are distinctly different in the parenchymal cells (PC) and the nonparenchymal liver cells (Berg and Boman 1973). The biochemical and morphological differences are also reflected in the finding that lysosomes of PC, Kupffer cells (KC), and endothelial cells (EC) show different density distributions after isopycnic centrifugation in sucrose and Nycodenz gradients (Kindberg et al 1990). The density distribution of lysosomes of individual cells can be followed after injecting intravenously 1251-tyramine-cellobiose-labelled ligands that are selectively taken up by receptor-mediated endocytosis in only one cell type (Berg et al 1985). Following degradation the labelled degradation products are trapped in the lysosomes of the cells in which uptake took place and may therefore serve as markers for these organelles. Lysosomal heterogeneity may also be seen in the individual cells. By means of subcellular fractionation techniques combined with the “trap-label” method it has been possible to observe subpopulations of lysosomes in PC and EC that may be involved in degradation of substrates brought into the lysosomes by heterophagy and autophagy.


Parenchymal Cell Kupffer Cell Mannose Receptor Lysosomal Enzyme Activity Nonparenchymal Liver Cell 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Berg T, Boman D (1973) Distribution of lysosomal enzymes between parenchymal and Kupffer cells of rat liver. Biochim.biophys Acta 321:585–596PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berg T, Kindberg, GM, Ford T, Blomhoff R (1985) Intracellular transport of asialoglycoproteins in rat hepatocytes. Evidence for two subpopulations of lysosomes. Exp Cell Res 161:285–296PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eskild W, Kindberg GM Smedsrød B, Blomhoff R, Norum KR, Berg T (1989) Intracellular transport of formaldehyde– treated albumin in liver endothelial cells after uptake via scavenger receptors. Biochem J 258:511–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Griffiths G, Back R, Marsh M (1989) A quantitative analysis of the endocytic pathway in baby hamster kidney cells. J Cell Biol 109:2703–2720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kindberg GM, Magnusson S, Berg T, Smedsrød B (1990) Receptor-mediated endocytosis of ovalbumin by two carbohydrate specific receptors in rat liver cells. Biochem J 270:197–203PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kindberg GM, Refsnes M, Christof fersen T, Norum HR, Berg T (1987) The relationship between autophagy and the intracellular degradation of asialoglycoproteins in cultured rat hepatocytes. J Biol Chem 262:7066–7071PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Kindberg GM, Stang E, Andersen KJ, Roos N, Berg T (1990) Intracellular transport of endocytosed proteins in rat liver endothelial cells. Biochem J 270:205–211PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Magnusson S, Berg T (1989) Extremely rapid endocytosis via the mannose receptor of sinusoidal endothelial rat liver cells. Biochem J 257:651–656PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Misquith S, Wattiaux-De Coninck, Wattiaux R (1988) Uptake and intracellular transport in rat liver of formaldehyde– treated bovine serum albumin labelled with 1251-tyramine cellobiose. Eur J Biochem 174:691–697PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Seglen PO, Solheim AE (1985) Conversion of dense lysosomes into light lysosomes during hepatocytic autophagy. Exp Cell Res 157:550–555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Smedsrod B, Pertoft H, Gustafson S, Laurent TC (1990) Scavenger functions of the liver endothelial cell. Biochem J 266:313–327PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Stang E, Kindberg GM, Berg T, Roos N (1990) Endocytosis mediated by the mannose receptor in liver endothelial cells. An immunocytochemical study. Eur J Cell Biol 52:67–76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Tolleshaug H (1981) Binding and internalization of asialoglycoproteins by isolated rat hepatocytes. Int J Biochem 13:45–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Tolleshaug H, Blomhoff R, Berg T (1983) Intracellular transport of endocytosed glycoproteins in rat hepatocytes. In: Protein Synthesis pp 267–285. Abraham KA, Eikholm TS, Pryme IF (eds) The Humana PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Ward DM, Kaplan J (1990) The rate of internalization of different receptor-ligand complexes in alveolar macrophages is receptor-specific. Biochem J 270:369–374PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Wattiaux R, Jadot M, Misquith S, Dubois F, Wattiaux-De Coninck S (1986) Differences in the cellular location of substances endocytosed by rat liver as observed from the distribution patterns obtained after isopycnic centrifugation in a sucrose gradient. Biochem Biophys Res Comm 136:504–509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wattiaux R, Misquith S, Wattiaux-De Coninck S, Dubois F (1989) Fate of asialofetuin endocytosed by rat liver. Biochem Biophys Res Comm 158:313–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Berg
    • 1
  • S. Magnusson
    • 1
  • E. Stang
    • 1
  • N. Roos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of OsloBlindern, Oslo 3Norway

Personalised recommendations