↓ Skip to main content

Lack of Contribution of p66shc and Its Mitochondrial Translocation to Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury and Cardioprotection by Ischemic Preconditioning

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Lack of Contribution of p66shc and Its Mitochondrial Translocation to Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury and Cardioprotection by Ischemic Preconditioning
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00733
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kerstin Boengler, Péter Bencsik, János Palóczi, Krisztina Kiss, Márton Pipicz, Judit Pipis, Péter Ferdinandy, Klaus-Dieter Schlüter, Rainer Schulz

Abstract

Whereas high amounts of reactive oxygen species (ROS) contribute to cardiac damage following ischemia and reperfusion (IR), low amounts function as trigger molecules in the cardioprotection by ischemic preconditioning (IPC). The mitochondrial translocation and contribution of the hydrogen peroxide-generating protein p66shc in the cardioprotection by IPC is unclear yet. In the present study, we investigated the mitochondrial translocation of p66shc, addressed the impact of p66shc on ROS formation after IR, and characterized the role of p66shc in IR injury per se and in the cardioprotection by IPC. The amount of p66shc in subsarcolemmal (SSM) and interfibrillar mitochondria (IFM) isolated from wildtype mouse left ventricles (LV) was determined after 40 min normoxic perfusion and after 30 min ischemia and 10 min reperfusion without and with IPC. The p66shc content in SSM (in % of normoxic controls, n = 5) was 174 ± 16% (n = 6, p < 0.05) after IR, and was reduced to 128 ± 13% after IPC (n = 6, p = ns). In IFM, the amount of p66shc remained unchanged (IR: 81 ± 7%, n = 6; IPC: 110 ± 5%, n = 6, p = ns). IR induced an increase in ROS formation in SSM and IFM isolated from mouse wildtype LV, which was more pronounced in SSM than in IFM (1.18 ± 0.18 vs. 0.81 ± 0.16, n = 6, p < 0.05). In mitochondria from p66shc-knockout mice (p66shc-KO), the increase in ROS formation by IR was not different between SSM and IFM (0.90 ± 0.11 vs. 0.73 ± 0.08, n = 6, p = ns). Infarct size (in % of the left ventricle) was 51.7 ± 2.9% in wildtype and 59.7 ± 3.8% in p66shc-KO hearts in vitro and was significantly reduced to 35.8 ± 4.4% (wildtype) and 34.7 ± 5.6% (p66shc-KO) by IPC, respectively. In vivo, infarct size was 57.8 ± 2.9% following IR (n = 9) and was reduced to 40.3 ± 3.5% by IPC (n = 11, p < 0.05) in wildtype mice. In p66shc-knockout mice, infarct sizes were similar to those measured in wildtype animals (IR: 56.2 ± 4.3%, n = 11; IPC: 42.1 ± 3.9%, n = 13, p < 0.05). Taken together, the mitochondrial translocation of p66shc following IR and IPC differs between mitochondrial populations. However, similar infarct sizes after IR and preserved infarct size reductions by IPC in p66shc-KO mice suggest that p66shc-derived ROS are not involved in the cardioprotection by IPC nor do they contribute to IR injury per se.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

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 > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 18%
Engineering 1 9%
Unknown 5 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 October 2021.
All research outputs
#8,324,392
of 25,713,737 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,993
of 15,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,594
of 331,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#102
of 323 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,713,737 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
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 331,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 323 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.