双孔钾通道TASK-1 的研究进展

双孔钾离子通道是一种背景钾离子通道,广泛分布于各种兴奋和非兴奋细胞中,并具有许多重要的生理功能。TASK-1是双孔钾离子通道家族的重要一员,它对缺氧和细胞外酸化敏感,参与形成心肌动作电位平台期,调节呼吸、肺动脉平滑肌收缩和醛固酮的分泌,并且是麻醉剂的作用靶点,人们不断对其进行研究并取得了很多重要结果,本文将概述双孔钾通道TASK-1的研究进展。     

双孔钾通道TASK-1的研究进展

双孔钾离子通道是一种背景钾离子通道,广泛分布于各种兴奋和非兴奋细胞中,并具有许多重要的生理功能。TASK-1是双孔钾离子通道家族的重要一员,它对缺氧和细胞外酸化敏感,参与形成心肌动作电住平台期,调节呼吸、肺动脉平滑肌收缩和醛固酮的分泌,并且是麻醉剂的作用靶点,人们不断对其进行研究并取得了很多重要结果,本文将概述双孔钾通道TASK-1的研究进展。     

5-羟色胺和/或pH值的变化对大鼠舌下神经元漏钾电流的调制作用(英文)

克隆的TWIK相关酸敏感型钾通道1(TWIK-related acid-sensitive K+ channel,TASK-1)对生理范围的pH值变化较为敏感(pK～7.4)。最近在多种脑干运动神经元上发现了TASK-1样通道,主要功能为编码背景性漏钾电流(TASK-1-like current)。本文旨在研究舌下神经元漏钾电流的特性,以及5-羟色胺(5-HT)和/或灌流液pH值的变化对该电流的影响及其可能的机制。以出生后7～8d的Sprague-Dawley(SD)大鼠为研究对象,应用活脑片技术获取大鼠舌下神经核细胞,利用脑片全细胞膜片钳技术记录并分析运动神经元漏钾电流和超极化激活的阳离子电流(hyperpolarization-activated cationic current,Ih)。结果显示,漏钾电流和Ih可以被pH6.0的酸性人工脑脊液(artificial cerebrospinal fluid,ACSF)所抑制,亦可被pH8.5的碱性ACSF所激活。10μmol/L 5-HT可显著抑制漏钾电流和Ih,并可使舌下神经元去极化,诱发阈下震荡和/或动作电位。给予5-HT2受体拮抗剂Ketanseri...     

缺氧对人肺动脉平滑肌细胞双孔钾通道TASK-1影响及非受体酪氨酸激酶的调节作用

目的:探讨缺氧对人肺动脉平滑肌细胞内向整流酸敏感性双孔钾通道(TASK-1)的影响,及非受体酪氨酸激酶(c-Src)对该过程的调节作用。方法:培养人肺动脉平滑肌细胞(h PASMCs):分为正常组、缺氧30 min组、缺氧6 h组、缺氧48 h组及缺氧48 h+PP2组、缺氧48 h+PP3组和缺氧48 h+bp V组,应用流式细胞仪检测细胞周期,RT-PCR及Western blot方法测定不同组细胞TASK-1的mRNA及蛋白表达变化。结果:1细胞周期显示:与正常对照组相比,随缺氧时间延长,S期百分率增加;与缺氧48 h组相比,缺氧48 h+PP2组S期百分率下降;2急性缺氧6 h组TASK-1 mRNA表达增加,慢性缺氧组TASK-1 mRNA表达降低,急、慢性缺氧组TASK-1蛋白表达减少;c-Src抑制剂PP2可促进TASK-1 mRNA及蛋白表达,酪氨酸磷酯酶抑制剂bp V抑制TASK-1蛋白表达。结论:缺氧促进人肺动脉平滑肌细胞增殖,非受体酪氨酸激酶c-Src介导急、慢性缺氧对双孔钾通道TASK-1调控过程,可能与缺氧性人肺血管收缩存在一定的相关性。     

二十二碳六烯酸对心房颤动大鼠心房肌生理改变及双孔钾通道TASK-1蛋白表达的影响

目的：探讨二十二碳六烯酸（DHA）对大鼠心房颤动（AF）模型心房肌生理特性的影响及相关机制研究。方法：80只乙酰胆碱-氯化钙混合液敏感的SD大鼠分为对照组（CTL组）、DHA处理组（DHA组）、房颤组（AF组）和房颤+DHA处理组（DHA+AF组）,观察房颤持续时间;采用全细胞膜片钳技术记录大鼠心房肌细胞动作电位时程（APD）和双孔钾通道TASK-1电流,Western blot测定大鼠心房组织TASK-1蛋白表达。结果：大鼠尾静脉注射乙酰胆碱-氯化钙混合液后,房颤持续时间随实验天数增加而逐渐延长,DHA干预缩短房颤持续时间。与CTL组相比,AF组大鼠心房肌细胞复极50%时的动作电位时程（APD₅₀）和复极90%时的动作电位时程（APD₉₀）明显缩短,心房肌细胞TASK-1电流密度升高,蛋白表达升高（P<0.05）。与AF组相比,DHA+AF组大鼠心房肌细胞APD₅₀和APD₉₀明显延长,TASK-1电流密度和蛋白表达降低（P<0.05）。结论：DHA具有延长房颤大鼠心房肌细胞APD的作用,可能与其下调心房肌TASK-1蛋白的表达从而降低心房肌细胞TASK-1电流密度有关。     

高等植物K+吸收转运蛋白及其分子调节

K 在植物的生命活动中发挥着十分重要的作用。植物对K 的吸收,可分为高亲和吸收与低亲和吸收。在分子水平上,高亲和吸收主要由KUP/HAK/KT及HKT家族的K 转运蛋白来承担;而Shaker、KCO等家族的K 通道蛋白,则主要在植物的低亲和吸收中发挥重要作用。AKT1、HAK5及其在植物中的同源基因在高等植物K 吸收转运中占有举足轻重的地位。KUP/HAK/KT家族基因的调节,主要是转录水平的调节,而K 通道蛋白的调节则可能主要是一种翻译后调节。植物的蛋白激酶通过磷酸化K 通道蛋白来调节通道的活性,从而改变K 的吸收特性。本文综述了高等植物K 吸收运转及调节的分子机制研究方面的最新进展,并对研究的前景进行了展望。     

T淋巴细胞上的离子通道

近年的研究证明,淋巴细胞上的离子通道,在免疫功能调节中具有重要的作用。T淋巴细胞上主要有三类离子通道,即Ca2 、K 和C1-通道。Ca2 通过T淋巴细胞膜上的Ca2 通道(CRAC)进入细胞内,可作为第二信使激活T淋巴细胞。通过K 通道的K 外流是T淋巴细胞膜电位形成的基础。由于膜电位水平可以影响钙离子的内流,因此,K 通道可以间接调节T淋巴细胞的活化和功能。T淋巴细胞上的Cl-通道是新近发现的一种离子通道,可能与细胞的体积调节有关。本文扼要总结了T淋巴细胞上离子通道的新近进展。     

微动脉平滑肌细胞K+通道的研究进展

K+通道维持着血管平滑肌细胞的静息膜电位.目前发现血管微动脉平滑肌细胞上主要表达内向整流型K+通道、ATP敏感型K+通道、电压依赖型K+通道和大电导钙激活型K+通道等四种K+通道.本文对微动脉平滑肌细胞K+通道最新进展做一综述.     

钾通道家族新成员:双孔道钾通道的研究进展

双孔道钾通道（K2p）是钾通道超家族的新成员。它广泛分布于兴奋和非兴奋组织中,具有4次跨膜片段、两个孔道结构域的结构特征,目前主要分为：TWIK、多不饱和脂肪酸激活的钾通道、TASK和KCNK沉寂亚单位四类。K2p具有瞬间激活和不失活,以及对TEA、4－AP等经典钾通道阻断剂不敏感的电生理特性,参与调节背景钾电流或钾漏流。许多机械性和化学性刺激如细胞牵拉、pH值的变化、第二信使、花生四烯酸和吸入麻醉剂等均参与调控K2p通道。     

剪切力诱导微血管内皮细胞K~ 通道的开放

利用膜片钳及内皮细胞流动小室方法对大鼠脑微血管内皮细胞在剪切力作用下内皮细胞膜K 通道的开放进行了初步研究 ,结果提示脑微血管内皮细胞膜上存在剪切力敏感的K 通道 ,剪切力作用后 ,内皮细胞膜上K 电流明显增大 ,此电流有明显的短暂延迟现象 ,也可以被胞外施加的TEA抑制 ,符合IKv特征。流动剪切力可以通过影响内皮细胞膜上的K 通道的开放引起穿细胞的离子通透性的增加 ,进而引起细胞内Ca2 的变化。在K 、Ca2 等离子浓度改变的诱导下可以促使G -Actin装配为F -Actin。同时诱导内皮细胞内钙库调节机制的激活 ,这些变化都可以进一步引起细胞信号转导机制的激活。该工作为进一步开展剪切力对微血管内皮细胞信号转导机制的影响提供了实验数据。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor