| Literature DB >> 32007101 |
Angus Lindsay1,2,3, Cory W Baumann1, Robyn T Rebbeck2, Samantha L Yuen2, William M Southern2, James S Hodges4, Razvan L Cornea2, David D Thomas2, James M Ervasti2, Dawn A Lowe5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dystrophin deficiency sensitizes skeletal muscle of mice to eccentric contraction (ECC)-induced strength loss. ECC protocols distinguish dystrophin-deficient from healthy, wild type muscle, and test the efficacy of therapeutics for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). However, given the large lab-to-lab variability in ECC-induced strength loss of dystrophin-deficient mouse skeletal muscle (10-95%), mechanical factors of the contraction likely impact the degree of loss. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to which mechanical variables impact sensitivity of dystrophin-deficient mouse skeletal muscle to ECC.Entities:
Keywords: Dystrophin; Eccentric contraction; Force drop; Muscle damage; Oxidative stress; Ryanodine receptor; SERCA; Skeletal muscle
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32007101 PMCID: PMC6995146 DOI: 10.1186/s13395-020-0221-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Skelet Muscle ISSN: 2044-5040 Impact factor: 4.912
ECC protocols in research for testing susceptibility of isolated male mdx EDL muscle to force loss
| Parameter | Allen [ | Brooks [ | Faulkner/Chamberlain [ | Davies [ | Duan [ | Gailly [ | Lowe/Ervasti [ | Lynch [ | Marechal [ | Mendell/Janssen [ | Morley/Head [ | Sweeney/Barton [ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mouse age (converted to nearest month) | 2–3 | 5 | 1–2a [ 7–10a [ | 2–3 | 2–3 | 3–4 | 3–6 [ 3 [ 6 [ | 2–3 | 1–16 | 1–5 [ 2–3 [ | 1–2 and 6–7 | 3 and 14 [ 3 [ |
| Bath temperature (°C) | 22 | 25 | 25 | Not specified | 30 | 20 | 25 | 25 | 20 | 30 | 22–24 | 23 |
| Number of contractions | 10 | 1 | 2–6 | 5 | 10 | 7 | 10 | 6 | 12 | 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Time between contractions (s) | 30 | n/a | 10 | 300 | 120 | 10 | 180 | 120 | 180d | 120 | 300 | 240Ɛ |
| Total length change (%) | 30 | 20–60b | 30b | 7.7 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 5–40b | 15–17b | 5–10 | 15 | 10 |
| Lengthening velocity ( | 3.0 | 2b | 1b | 6.6–11.1 mm/s | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 2.0b | 1.0b | 0.5 [ 0.5b [ | 1 mm/s | 0.5 |
| Contraction duration (ms) | 100 | 100–300e | 300e | 140 | 200 | 90 | 200 | 25–200e | 150–170e | 200 | ~ 3750e | 200 |
| Stimulation Frequency (Hz) | 120f | ~ 130f | 180f | Not specified | 150 | 125 | 175 | Not specified | 125 | 150f | 100 | 80 and 120 [ 80 [ |
| Isometric force loss (%) | 60–70 | 10–50 | ~ 75–90 | 55 | ~ 55 | > 90 | 80–90 | 60–70 | 38 | 80–95 | ~ 8–60g | 64 |
Studies are representative and do not encompass all published protocols on whole EDL muscle from mdx mice studied ex vivo
Protocols are identified based the principal investigator’s laboratory
All mdx mice had a variation of the C57BL/10 background unless indicated otherwise
ECC eccentric contraction, L optimal muscle length
Contraction duration is the time during the eccentric portion of the ECC
Isometric force loss is either the percent change in isometric tetanic force between the first and last contraction generated during the isometric plateau of the ECC or that from separate maximal isometric tetanic contractions before and then following the ECC protocol
aC57BL/6 background
bCalculated and reported based on fiber length rather than muscle length
cPapers that include data on skeletal muscles in addition to EDL muscle
dTime between eccentric contractions followed by 15 min between two sets of 6 ECC
eStimulation duration calculated or estimated from publication
fStimulation frequency of isometric tetanic contractions [stimulation frequency of ECC not specified]
gLoss of isometric force is age-dependent
Predictors of ECC-induced strength loss in isolated EDL and anterior crural muscles of mdx mice
| ECC:ISO | Work | Length/angle change | Contraction velocity | Contraction duration | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ex vivo—(isometric force loss) | 0.310 ( | 0.563 ( | 0.538 ( | 0.030 ( | 0.455 ( |
| In vivo—(isometric torque loss) | 0.400 ( | 0.542 ( | 0.780 ( | 0.005 ( | 0.311 ( |
ECC:ISO ratio of maximal eccentric to maximal isometric force
Values = coefficient of determination (R2) following 10 and 70 ECC for ex vivo and in vivo contractions, respectively
Fig. 1Mechanical factors that impact the sensitivity of mdx EDL muscle to ECC ex vivo. a Maximal eccentric force as a fraction of maximal isometric tetanic force for each eccentric protocol and b when grouped into length changes. c Work completed during the first contraction of each eccentric protocol and d when grouped into length change. Different from *5%, #10%, and $20%. e Maximal isometric tetanic force (120 Hz) following 10 eccentric contractions as a percent of maximal isometric force before ECC (initial). Different from the *first, #second, and $third protocol within a given length change. f Isometric tetanic force as a percent of initial for each protocol when collapsed into length changes and g velocities. Different from *5%, #10%, and $20%. h Isometric tetanic force as a percent of initial for each protocol when grouped into contraction durations. Lo, optimal muscle length. Different from *25 ms, #50 ms, $66 ms, and +100 ms. Data are mean ± S.E.M with significance set at p < 0.05. N = 5–6/protocol
Fig. 2Mechanical factors that impact sensitivity of mdx anterior crural muscles to ECC in vivo. a Eccentric torque as a ratio of maximal isometric torque, b eccentric torque loss, and c isometric torque as a percent of initial following 70 eccentric contractions at varying stimulation frequencies muscles using a 40° angle change at 2000°/s. Different from *0 Hz, #52 Hz, $71 Hz, and Ɛ93 Hz. d Eccentric torque as a ratio of maximal isometric torque using, e eccentric torque loss, and f isometric torque as a percent of initial following 70 eccentric contractions at varying degrees of angle change at 2000°/s and 150 Hz. Different from *0°, #5°, $10°, and Ɛ20°. g Eccentric torque as a ratio of maximal isometric torque, h eccentric torque loss, and i isometric torque as a percent of initial following 70 eccentric contractions at varying velocities and contraction durations a using a 40° angle change. Different from *125°/s. j Eccentric torque as a ratio of maximal isometric torque, k eccentric torque loss, and l isometric torque as a percent of initial following 70 eccentric contractions using a 10° angle change at varying velocities and contraction durations. Different from *62°/s, #125°/s, $250°/s, and Ɛ500°/s. Data are mean ± S.E.M with significance set at p < 0.05. N = 3–9/protocol
Fig. 3Mechanical factors of an ECC impact sarcolemmal permeability of mdx anterior crural muscles in vivo. a Fluorescent microscopy for Evan’s blue dye (EBD; red) and laminin (green) of mdx tibialis anterior muscle exposed to three eccentric contraction protocols that vary by angle change (10° and 40°) and stimulation frequency (0 and 150 Hz). b Quantification of the percentage of EBD-positive fibers in mdx tibialis anterior muscle subjected to one of three eccentric contraction protocols. No ECC = contralateral tibialis anterior not subjected to eccentric contractions, ECC = subjected to eccentric contractions. *Different from control; # 40°, 2000°/s, 0 Hz; $10°, 2000°/s, 150 Hz. Data are mean ± S.E.M with significance set at p < 0.05. N = 4/protocol
Fig. 4Magnitude of ECC length change differentially affect the impacts of NAC on mdx EDL muscle. a Eccentric and b isometric force losses as percentages of initial forces in isolated EDL muscle of C57BL/10, mdx and mdx incubated with 20 mM NAC challenged by ECCs with a 10% length change or c, d 5% length change. *Different from C57BL/10, #different from mdx. Data are mean ± S.E.M with significance set at p < 0.05. N = 3–12/protocol or group
Fig. 5Activation of SERCA1a and inhibition of RyR1 leak attenuates ECC-induced force loss of mdx muscle. a Eccentric force loss of isolated mdx EDL muscle incubated with small molecule SERCA1a activators (DS-11966966 and CDN1163) at their optimal concentration (*DS-11966966 different from vehicle and #CDN1163 different from vehicle); b ryanodine receptor (RyR1) leak inhibitors (Chloroxine and Myricetin) at their optimal concentration (*Chloroxine different from vehicle, #Myricetin different from vehicle); c a combination of CDN1163 and Myricetin, a combination of CDN1163 + Myricetin + 20 mM N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) (*different from vehicle); and (d) isometric force as percent of initial immediately following the 10th eccentric contraction with and without all SERCA1a and RyR1 small-molecule modulators. e Maximal rates of tetanic contraction and f maximal rates of tetanic relaxation as a percent of initial of mdx EDL muscle with or without 20 mM N-acetyl cysteine (NAC). *Different from mdx. All ECC protocols were completed with a 5% length change. *Different from vehicle, #different from vehicle and DS-11966966, and $different from vehicle, DS-11966966, Chloroxine, CDN1163, and Myricetin. Data are mean ± S.E.M with significance set at p < 0.05. N = 5–12/compound or combination of compounds