Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The presence as well as the pharmacological, molecular, and functional properties of pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide (PACAP) receptors have been analyzed in human liver membranes compared in parallel with vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) receptors. [125I]PACAP-27 bound to two classes of receptors with high [dissociation constant (Kd) = 0.47 nmol/L] and low (Kd = 8.0 nmol/L) affinities that represented about 34% and 66% of total binding sites, respectively. The pharmacological profile of [125I]VIP and [125I]PACAP-27 binding to membranes supported the coexistence with VIP receptors of specific receptors for PACAP with a mol wt equal to 67.7K. When [125I]PACAP-27 was used, the order of potency of various related peptides for competition of tracer binding was PACAP-27 greater than PACAP-38 greater than VIP. Both PACAP-27 and VIP stimulated adenylate cyclase activity with similar efficacy, although PACAP-27 showed a potency (half-maximal efficient concentration or EC50 = 0.5 nmol/L) greater than that of VIP (EC50 = 4.1 nmol/L). When the two peptides were present simultaneously in the incubation medium, no additive effect on the stimulation of adenylate cyclase activity was observed, which suggests a unique receptor coupled to this enzyme.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guijarro et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: