| Literature DB >> 34337647 |
Jinhee H Hwang1, Michael E Spurlock2, John C Kube3, Xiang Z Li1, Stephen B Smith1.
Abstract
Chinese hamster ovEntities:
Keywords: Bovine adipose tissue; cAMP; lipolysis; β-adrenergic ligands; β-adrenergic receptors
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34337647 PMCID: PMC8326056 DOI: 10.1093/jas/skab116
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Sci ISSN: 0021-8812 Impact factor: 3.159
Primers for RT-qPCR
| Gene | Accession number | Sequence | Amplicon length (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADRB1 | NM_194266.1 | F: 5′-CAGAAGGCACTCAAGACGCT-3′ | 81 |
| R: 5′-CACCACGTTGGCTAGGAAGA-3′ | |||
| ADRB2 | NM_174231.1 | F: 5′-TGATCGCTGTGGATCGCTAC-3′ | 149 |
| R: 5′-CCGGTACCAGTGCATCTGAA-3′ | |||
| ADRB3 | NM_174232.2 | F: 5′-ACCTTCATTCTGTTCCTTCTG-3′ | 145 |
| R: 5′-CTGTGAGGTAGGTGTGTCTA-3′ | |||
| GAPDH | NM_001034034.2 | F: 5′-CTGCCCGTTCGACAGATAG-3′ | 76 |
| R: 5′-CTCCGACCTTCACCATCTTG-3′ | |||
| RPS9 | NM_001101152.2 | F: 5′-GAGCTGGGTTTGTCGCAAAA-3′ | 65 |
| R: 5′-GGTCGAGGCGGGACTTCT-3′ | |||
| SDHA | NM_174178.2 | F: 5′-ACCTGATGCTTTGTGCTCTG-3′ | 106 |
| R: 5′-TCGTACTCGTCAACCCTCTC-3′ |
Induction of cAMP (EC50, M) in CHO cells transfected with bovine β 1-, β 2-, or β 3-adregernic receptor constructs1
| Treatment | β 1-Construct | β 2-Construct | β 3-Construct |
|---|---|---|---|
| ZIL | ND2 | 8.9 × 10–8 | 9.1 × 10–6 |
| RAC3 | 2.0 × 10–9 | 4.6 × 10–8 | 2.4 × 10–8 |
| LUB | 1.9 × 10–7 | ND1 | 6.0 × 10–9 |
1The concentration of cAMP was determined using the LANCE cAMP detection kit (AD0262E) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Cell lysates were incubated for 20 hr prior to measuring fluorescence. A standard curve was generated with increasing concentrations of cAMP, and the linear portion of the curve was used to calculate sample cAMP concentrations. A standard curve was generated with increasing concentrations of cAMP, and the linear portion of the curve was used to calculate sample cAMP concentrations.
2ND indicates that cAMP accumulation was either not detected or insufficient to allow a response curve EC50 calculation.
3Racemic mixture of RAC.
Figure 1.β-Adrenergic receptor gene populations in growing steers analyzed by RT-qPCR. The different efficacy of cDNA synthesis between samples was normalized with 3 reference genes (ribosomal protein 9, RSP9; glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, GAPDH; and succinate dehydrogenase, SDHA). The relative expression of mRNA was determined by the CT deviation of an unknown sample vs. geometric mean of the three reference genes. Data are expressed as means ± SEM (n = 10). ABMeans within s.c. adipose tissue not sharing common superscripts differ (P < 0.05). abMeans within i.m. adipose tissue not sharing common superscripts differ (P < 0.05). * P < 0.05, **< P < 0.001 s.c. vs. i.m. adipose tissue.
Fatty acid synthesis from acetate in subcutaneous and intramuscular adipose tissue incubated time 0 (immediately after samples arrived at the laboratory) and time 60 (60 min after samples arrived at the laboratory)1
| Incubation time, min | Time 0 | Time 60 |
|---|---|---|
| s.c. | 45.56 ± 8.57b | 89.63 ± 17.79a |
| i.m. | 26.65 ± 8.46a | 39.21 ± 9.91a |
1Values are mean ± SEM for n = 16 steers. Rates are nanomole acetate converted to fatty acids per 100 mg adipose tissue per 1 hr incubation. abMeans within a row with common superscripts do not differ (P > 0.05). The main effect of tissue (subcutaneous vs. intramuscular) was significant (P = 0.003).
Figure 2.cAMP production in s.c. (A) and i.m. (B) adipose tissue in response to ISO hydrochloride (IH). Tissues were incubated with IH for 30 min at 37 °C. Data are expressed as mean values (n = 5). The results at each concentration of IH were fitted by nonlinear regression. The concentration of cAMP was determined using the Cyclic AMP XP Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions, as described in Table 2.
Concentrations of cAMP, glycerol, and NEFA in extracts of subcutaneous (s.c.) and intramuscular (i.m.) adipose tissue incubated with RAC or ZIL1
| RAC | ZIL | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| s.c. | i.m. | s.c. | i.m. | |
|
| ||||
| Baseline | 0.42 ± 0.06 | 0.64 ± 0.19 | 0.42 ± 0.06 | 0.64 ± 0.19 |
| 10–8 | 0.39 ± 0.09 | 0.86 ± 0.22 | 0.76 ± 0.37 | 0.79 ± 0.30 |
| 10–7 | 0.38 ± 0.08 | 0.76 ± 0.18 | 0.61 ± 0.27 | 0.51 ± 0.13 |
| 10–6 | 0.44 ± 0.14 | 0.70 ± 0.18 | 0.62 ± 0.27 | 0.78 ± 0.39 |
|
| ||||
| Baseline | 50.0 ± 12.8 | 48.6 ± 10.3 | 50.0 ± 12.8 | 48.6 ± 10.3 |
| 10–8 | 50.3 ± 7.60 | 52.4 ± 16.4 | 54.8 ± 8.0 | 67.4 ± 21.6 |
| 10–7 | 52.6 ± 11.1 | 81.7 ± 25.5 | 59.3 ± 15.4 | 48.6 ± 13.7 |
| 10–6 | 63.3 ± 9.20 | 42.6 ± 11.4 | 65.9 ± 12.6 | 46.0 ± 14.5 |
|
| ||||
| Baseline | 0.99 ± 0.40 | 0.65 ± 0.20 | 0.99 ± 0.40 | 0.65 ± 0.20 |
| 10–8 | 1.10 ± 0.15 | 0.75 ± 0.21 | 1.06 ± 0.30 | 0.78 ± 0.28 |
| 10–7 | 1.20 ± 0.21 | 1.18 ± 0.50 | 1.25 ± 0.31 | 0.91 ± 0.30 |
| 10–6 | 1.06 ± 0.13 | 0.56 ± 0.13 | 1.17 ± 0.35 | 0.50 ± 0.16 |
1The concentration of cAMP was determined using the Cyclic AMP XP Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions, as described in Table 2. Lipolysis was measured based on changes in glycerol and NEFA concentrations using commercial kits according to the each manufacturer’s protocol. To determine glycerol released from tissue, cell extracts were reacted with glycerol reaction reagent and the absorbance read at 570 nm. The glycerol standard provided in the assay kit was used for the calibration curve. To determine NEFA released from the adipose tissues, cell extract plus first reagent were incubated, followed by the addition of the second reagent. The absorbance was read at 550 nm. Oleic acid was used to establish a standard curve for calculation of the NEFA concentration.
2Values are mean ± SEM; n = 6 steers. Means within treatment and tissue were not different (P > 0.05).
Figure 3.Glycerol and NEFA release in s.c. (A and C) and i.m. (B and D) adipose tissue in response to ISO hydrochloride (IH). Tissues were incubated with IH for 30 min at 37 °C (n = 5). Glycerol (A and B) and NEFA (C and D) released in tissue supernatant were determined. Data are expressed as mean values (n = 5). Lipolysis was measured based on changes in glycerol and NEFA concentrations using commercial kits as described in Table 4. The results at each concentration of IH were fitted by nonlinear regression.
Adipose tissue lipolytic sensitivity (−logEC50) to β-AR ligands1
| s.c. | i.m. | |
|---|---|---|
| LUB | 7.40 ± 1.782 | N.A.3 |
| BRL-37344 | 7.00 ± 3.27 | N.A. |
| SAL | 6.23 ± 0.35 | 4.59 ± 4.42 |
| SAL + LUB | 3.34 ± 0.59 *** | 8.07 ± 4.90 |
| SAL+ LUB + L-748,337 | 4.04 ± 0.34 *** | N.A. |
| DOB | 5.50 ± 0.68 | 6.52 ± 1.23 |
| DOB + LUB | 6.44 ± 3.20 | 7.29 ± 1.44 |
| DOB+ LUB + L-748,337 | 5.87 ± 0.81 | 6.12 ± 1.70 |
1The concentration of cAMP was determined using the Cyclic AMP XP Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions, as described in Table 2.
2Values are mean ± SEM of sensitivity of adipose tissue (−logEC50); n = 12 cattle. EC50 was calculated from the individual concentration-response to agonists fitted together by nonlinear regression. EC50, half maximum effective response.
3NA, not applicable. It was not possible to calculate EC50 from the data.
***P < 0.001, vs. SAL.
Figure 4.cAMP and NEFA release in response to BRL-37344 and LUB in s.c. (A and C) and i.m. (B and D) adipose tissue. Tissues were incubated with either BRL-37344 or LUB for 30 min at 37 °C. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 6). *P < 0.05 LUB vs. BRL-37344. The concentration of cAMP was determined using the Cyclic AMP XP Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions, as described in Table 2. Lipolysis was measured based on changes in glycerol and NEFA concentrations using commercial kits as described in Table 4.
Figure 5.Depression of cAMP production in response to propranolol hydrochloride (PH) (A and B) and L-748,337 (C and D) in s.c. and i.m. adipose tissue. Tissues were preincubated with 10 µM L-748,337 or 50 µM propranolol, and then LUB was added for an additional 30 min. The concentration of cAMP was determined using the Cyclic AMP XP7 Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions, as described in Table 2. Data are expressed as mean values (n = 8). The results at each concentration of LUB were fitted by nonlinear regression.
Figure 6.cAMP production in response to β 1- and β 2-AR agonists in s.c. (A and C) and i.m. adipose tissue (B and D). Tissues were preincubated with 1 µM LUB or 1 µM LUB + 10 µM L-748,337, and then salbutamol (A, B) or dobutamine (B, D) was added for an additional 30 min. The concentration of cAMP was determined using the Cyclic AMP XP Assay Kit according to the manufacturer’s instructions, as described in Table 2. The results of each individual concentration-response to salbutamol and dobutamine were fitted by nonlinear regression. Data are means (n = 5). *P < 0.05.