AJP - Endo Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab (January 6, 2004). doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00507.2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
286/5/E773    most recent
00507.2003v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ding, K.-H.
Right arrow Articles by Isales, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ding, K.-H.
Right arrow Articles by Isales, C. M.
Submitted on November 11, 2003
Accepted on January 4, 2004

Glucose-dependent Insulinotropic Peptide: Differential Effects on Hepatic Artery versus Portal Vein Endothelial Cells

Ke-Hong Ding1, Qing Zhong1, Jianrui Xu1, and Carlos M. Isales2*

1 Institute of Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA
2 Institute of Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA; Augusta VA Medical Center, Augusta, GA, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: cisales{at}mail.mcg.edu.

Glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) has been reported to have opposing effects on splanchnic blood flow. GIP infusion in dogs results in an increase in portal vein circulation but a drop in hepatic artery blood flow. In an effort to evaluate whether these different responses were related to intrinsic differences in GIP effects we isolated canine hepatic artery (HAEC) and portal vein (PVEC) endothelial cells. We report that there are differences in GIP activation of the signal transduction pathways in these two cell types. GIP stimulates secretion of Endothelin-1 (ET-1), a potent vasoconstrictor, from HAEC (EC50: 0.28 nM) but not from PVEC. This effect could be abolished by preventing a rise in intracellular calcium demonstrating the calcium dependency of GIP-induced ET-1 secretion from HAEC. The GIP effect was specific, since a GIP receptor antagonist blocked it. In contrast, GIP stimulated nitric oxide production from PVEC (EC50: 0.09 nM) but not from HAEC. Taken together our data demonstrate distinct differences in GIP effects on HAEC from those on PVEC. We conclude that differences in GIP stimulation of ET-1 vs. nitric oxide production in different vascular beds may account for some of the observed differences in its physiological effects.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
Q. Zhong, T. Itokawa, S. Sridhar, K.-H. Ding, D. Xie, B. Kang, W. B. Bollag, R. J. Bollag, M. Hamrick, K. Insogna, et al.
Effects of glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide on osteoclast function
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, February 1, 2007; 292(2): E543 - E548.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2004 by the American Physiological Society.