Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15018838

Cotransmission.

Geoffrey Burnstock
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

After some early hints, cotransmission was proposed in 1976 and the 'chemical coding' gradually established for sympathetic, parasympathetic, sensory-motor, enteric and some invertebrate nerves. More recently, cotransmission has been recognised in the central nervous system. ATP appears to be a primitive signalling molecule that has been retained as a cotransmitter in every nerve type in both peripheral and central nervous systems, although the relative role of ATP varies considerably in different species and pathological conditions. In the past two years, interest has focused on the mechanisms underlying cotransmission, plasticity and differential control of cotransmitter expression.

Explore related subjects

Adenosine TriphosphateAnimalsBiological TransportModels, BiologicalNeurotransmitter AgentsReceptors, DrugTerminology as TopicUnited KingdomJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Geoffrey Burnstock. 2004. Cotransmission.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coph.2003.08.001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2022

The human mitochondrial genome contains a second light strand promoter.

The human mitochondrial genome must be replicated and expressed in a timely manner to maintain energy metabolism and supply cells with adequate levels of adenosine triphosphate. Central to this process is the idea that replication primers and gene products both arise via transcription from a single light strand promoter (LSP) such that primer formation can influence gene expression, with no consensus as to how this is regulated. Here, we report the discovery of a second light strand promoter (LSP2) in humans, with features characteristic of a bona fide mitochondrial promoter. We propose that the position of LSP2 on the mitochondrial genome allows replication and gene expression to be orchestrated from two distinct sites, which expands our long-held understanding of mitochondrial gene expression in humans.

Adenosine Triphosphate↗
PubMed2021

GCN2 kinase activation by ATP-competitive kinase inhibitors.

Small-molecule kinase inhibitors represent a major group of cancer therapeutics, but tumor responses are often incomplete. To identify pathways that modulate kinase inhibitor response, we conducted a genome-wide knockout (KO) screen in glioblastoma cells treated with the pan-ErbB inhibitor neratinib. Loss of general control nonderepressible 2 (GCN2) kinase rendered cells resistant to neratinib, whereas depletion of the GADD34 phosphatase increased neratinib sensitivity. Loss of GCN2 conferred neratinib resistance by preventing binding and activation of GCN2 by neratinib. Several other Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved inhibitors, such erlotinib and sunitinib, also bound and activated GCN2. Our results highlight the utility of genome-wide functional screens to uncover novel mechanisms of drug action and document the role of the integrated stress response (ISR) in modulating the response to inhibitors of oncogenic kinases.

Adenosine Triphosphate↗
PubMed2005

The Ins(1,3,4)P3 5/6-kinase/Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase is not a protein kinase.

Among inositol phosphate kinases, Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase has been considered to be an outsider with disparate sequence, a proclaimed capacity to also phosphorylate proteins and apparent 1-phosphatase activity. Such multifunctionality, coupled with ignorance of its operational domains, complicates any mechanistic rationale behind literature reports that Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase regulates apoptosis, salt and fluid secretion, and transcription. We have expressed poly(His)-tagged human Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase in Sf9 insect cells and purified the enzyme using Ni-agarose chromatography. Protein kinase activity was eluted from the Ni-agarose column, but this did not co-elute with the Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase, indicating that the protein kinase and inositol kinase activities belong to separate proteins. To pursue this conclusion, we prepared catalytically inactive mutants of the Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase by identifying and targeting the ATP-binding site. Our strategy was based on sequence alignments suggesting homology of the Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase with ATP-grasp metabolic enzymes. Individual mutation of four candidate MgATP-binding participants, Lys157, Asp281, Asp295 and Asn297, severely compromised Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase activity. Yet, these mutations did not affect the protein kinase activity. We conclude that the Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase is not a protein kinase, contrary to earlier reports [e.g. Wilson, Sun, Cao and Majerus (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 40998-41004]. Elimination of protein kinase activity from the enzyme's repertoire and recognition of its ATP-grasp homology together indicate that structural, functional and catalytic relationships between Ins(3,4,5,6)P4 1-kinase and other inositol phosphate kinases are closer than previously thought [Gonzalez, Schell, Letcher, Veprintsev, Irvine and Williams (2004) Mol. Cell 15, 689-701].

Adenosine Triphosphate↗