| Literature DB >> 12433963 |
Rasmus Buchanan1, Ole Baekgaard Nielsen, Torben Clausen.
Abstract
In rat skeletal muscle, Na(+)-K(+) pump activity increases dramatically in response to excitation (up to 20-fold) or beta(2)-agonists (2-fold), leading to a reduction in intracellular Na(+). This study examines the time course of these effects and whether they are due to an increased affinity of the Na(+)-K(+) pump for intracellular Na(+). Isolated rat soleus muscles were incubated at 30 (o)C in Krebs-Ringer bicarbonate buffer. The effects of direct electrical stimulation on (86)Rb(+) uptake rate and intracellular Na(+) concentration ([Na(+)](i)) were characterized in the subsequent recovery phase. [Na(+)](i) was varied using monensin or buffers with low Na(+). In the [Na(+)](i) range 21-69 mM, both the beta(2)-agonist salbutamol and electrical stimulation produced a left shift of the curves relating (86)Rb(+) uptake rate to [Na(+)](i). In the first 10 s after 1 or 10 s pulse trains of 60 Hz, [Na(+)](i) showed no increase, but (86)Rb(+) uptake rate increased by 22 and 86 %, respectively. Muscles excited in Na(+)-free Li(+)-substituted buffer and subsequently allowed to rest in standard buffer also showed a significant increase in (86)Rb(+) uptake rate and decrease in [Na(+)](i). Na(+) loading induced by monensin or electroporation also stimulated (86)Rb(+) uptake rate but, contrary to excitation, increased [Na(+)](i). The increase in the rate of (86)Rb(+) uptake elicited by electrical stimulation was abolished by ouabain, but not by bumetanide. The results indicate that excitation (like salbutamol) induces a rapid increase in the affinity of the Na(+)-K(+) pump for intracellular Na(+). This leads to a Na(+)-K(+) pump activation that does not require Na(+) influx, but possibly the generation of action potentials. This improves restoration of the Na(+)-K(+) homeostasis during work and optimizes excitability and contractile performance of the working muscle.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2002 PMID: 12433963 PMCID: PMC2290663 DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2002.023325
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Physiol ISSN: 0022-3751 Impact factor: 5.182