| Title |
Differences in the control of basal L-type Ca2+ current by the cyclic AMP signaling cascade in frog, rat, and human cardiac myocytes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12576-015-0430-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rimantas Treinys, Andrius Bogdelis, Lina Rimkutė, Jonas Jurevičius, Vytenis Arvydas Skeberdis |
| Abstract |
β-adrenergic receptors (β-ARs) mediate the positive inotropic effects of catecholamines by cAMP-dependent phosphorylation of the L-type Ca(2+) channels (LTCCs), which provide Ca(2+) for the initiation and regulation of cell contraction. The overall effect of cAMP-modulating agents on cardiac calcium current (I Ca,L) and contraction depends on the basal activity of LTCCs which, in turn, depends on the basal activities of key enzymes involved in the cAMP signaling cascade. Our current work is a comparative study demonstrating the differences in the basal activities of β-ARs, adenylyl cyclase, phosphodiesterases, phosphatases, and LTCCs in the frog and rat ventricular and human atrial myocytes. The main conclusion is that the basal I Ca,L, and consequently the contractile function of the heart, is secured from unnecessary elevation of its activity and energy consumption at the several "checking-points" of cAMP-dependent signaling cascade and the loading of these "checking-points" may vary in different species and tissues. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 18% |
| Researcher | 2 | 18% |
| Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 36% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2016.
All research outputs
#21,476,880
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#267
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#337,655
of 397,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 397,507 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.