Why the study?
Does the lack of ANG AT1a receptors alter the central nervous system and endocrine response to dehydration in mice?
Does the lack of ANG AT1a receptors alter the central nervous system and endocrine response to dehydration in mice?
AT1a knockout mice exhibit a dichotomous response to dehydration, with reduced plasma vasopressin but enhanced PVN neuronal activation, highlighting the role of AT1a receptors in osmotic and endocrine balance.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AT1a KO dehydration responses in mice should not inform clinical practice; leaves open net receptor contributions to vasopressin regulation.
The objective was to determine the central nervous system (CNS) responses to dehydration (c-Fos and vasopressin mRNA) in mice lacking the ANG AT(1a) receptor [ANG AT(1a) knockout (KO)]. Control and AT(1a) KO mice were dehydrated for 24 or 48 h. Baseline plasma vasopressin (VP) was not different between the groups; however, the response to dehydration was attenuated in AT(1a) KO (24 +/- 11 vs. 10.6 +/- 2.7 pg/ml). Dehydration produced similar increases in plasma osmolality and depletion of posterior pituitary VP content. Neuronal activation was observed as increases in c-Fos protein and VP mRNA. The supraoptic responses were not different between groups. In the paraventricular nucleus (PVN), c-Fos-positive neurons (57.4 +/- 10.7 vs. 98.4 +/- 7.4 c-Fos cells/PVN, control vs. AT(1a) KO) and VP mRNA levels (1.0 +/- 0.1 vs. 1.4 +/- 0.1 microCi, control vs. AT(1a) KO) were increased with greater responses in AT(1a) KO. A comparison of 1- to 2-day water deprivation showed that plasma VP, brain c-Fos, and VP mRNA returned toward control on day 2, although plasma osmolality remained high. Data demonstrate that AT(1a) KO mice show a dichotomous response to dehydration, reduced for plasma VP and enhanced for PVN c-Fos protein and VP mRNA. The results illustrate the importance of ANG AT(1a) receptors in the regulation of osmotic and endocrine balance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Morris et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: