286 f 31-Adrenoceptor Stimulation and 32-Adrenoceptor Stimulation Differ in Their Effects on Contraction , Cytosolic Ca 2 + , and Ca 21 Current in Single Rat Ventricular Cells

R. Xiao,E. Lakatta
2005-01-01
Abstract:The effects of P2and P1-adrenoceptor (J2AR and f31AR, respectively) agonists on the cytosolic Ca21 (Ca1) transient (indexed by the transient increase in indo-1 fluorescence ratio after excitation), twitch amplitude (measured via photodiode array), membrane potential, and L-type sarcolemmal Ca2+ current (ICa, nieasured by whole-cell patch electrode) were assessed in single rat ventricular myocytes. The selective f2AR agonist Zinterol increased the amplitudes of both the Ca; transient and twitch in a concentration-dependent manner. Similar results were obtained when P2ARs were stimulated with isoproterenol in the presence of the selective I31AR antagonist CGP 20712A. f31AR stimulation induced by norepinephrine increased twitch amplitude to about the same extent as did P2AR stimulation. However, several striking differences between response to I31AR and f3AR stimulation were observed. f31AR stimulation had the potent effect of abbreviating the time course of the contraction and Caj transient, and R2AR stimulation did not reduce the time course of the Ca; transient and had only a minor effect on the twitch duration. For a given increase in twitch amplitude, ,81AR stimulation caused a greater increase in Caj transient, suggesting a diminished Ca1-myofilament interaction. f81AR, but not &AR, stimulation evoked spontaneous Caj oscillations, increased the diastolic indo fluorescence level, and caused a decline in resting cell length. f31AR and R2AR also differed in their effects on lCa. Whereas both /31AR and R2AR stimulation increased the peak lCa amplitude, IJ2AR stimulation markedly prolonged the lCa inactivation time. Accordingly, R%AR stimulation prolonged the action potential duration to a greater extent than did f31AR stimulation. 8-(4-Chlorophenylthio)cAMP mimicked the effects of .81AR stimulation by norepinephrine but not those due to f2AR stimulation. These results clearly indicate that both I2ARs and f32ARs functionally coexist in rat ventricular myocytes but that stimulation of these receptor subtypes elicits qualitatively different cell responses at the levels of ionic channels, the myofilaments, and sarcoplasmic reticulum. (Circulation Research 1993;73:286-300)
What problem does this paper attempt to address?