AMP and its analogue AMP alpha S potentiate ATP-induced contractile responses in the guinea-pig vas deferens, suggesting AMP may modulate endogenous ATP responses.
Findings in guinea-pig tissue advise against clinical extrapolation; extends purinergic observations but leaves open human cardiovascular relevance.
The effects of incubating the guinea-pig isolated vas deferens in the presence of adenine nucleotides (adenosine triphosphate, ATP; adenosine diphosphate, ADP; and adenosine monophosphate, AMP), or in the presence of their phosphorothioate analogues (adenosine 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate), ATP gamma S; adenosine 5'-O-(2-thiodiphosphate), ADP beta S; and adenosine 5'-monophosphorothioate, AMP alpha S), on contractile responses to ATP were compared. After challenge with a low (1 microM) or high (300 microM) concentration of ATP to obtain control responses, one vas deferens of a pair was incubated for 5 min with one of the adenine nucleotides, while the contralateral preparation was incubated with the corresponding phosphorothioate analogue. At the conclusion of the incubation the preparations were challenged again with ATP. Incubation with AMP or AMP alpha S resulted in a transient potentiation of responses to 1 microM and 300 microM ATP. The potentiation following incubation with AMP alpha S was larger than that produced by AMP. After incubation with ADP, ADP beta S, ATP and ATP gamma S, responses to 1 microM ATP were decreased, while those to 300 microM ATP were unaffected. Thus, incubation with AMP and AMP alpha S results in potentiation, rather than inhibition, of ATP-induced responses. On the other hand, 5'-diphosphate, 5'-triphosphate, 5'-O-(2-thiodiphosphate) and 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) moieties on adenosine have no effect or cause autoinhibition. These results indicate that AMP exerts a potentiating effect on reactivity to exogenous ATP. AMP arising from the enzymatic degradation of ATP might modulate the level of response to ATP released endogenously as a cotransmitter.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeffrey S. Fedan (1987) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: