AJP - Renal Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 252: F357-F360, 1987;
0363-6127/87 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Levine, S. D.
Right arrow Articles by Jacoby, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Levine, S. D.
Right arrow Articles by Jacoby, M.

AJP - Renal Physiology, Vol 252, Issue 2 357-F360, Copyright © 1987 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Comparison of effects of forskolin, cAMP, and vasopressin on Pf/Pd(w) of toad urinary bladder luminal membrane

S. D. Levine and M. Jacoby

We have reported that Pf/Pd(w) (the ratio of osmotic and diffusional water permeabilities) for the luminal membrane of toad urinary bladder is approximately 17 for tissues stimulated with either vasopressin or 8-bromoadenosine 3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (8-BrcAMP). In a recent abstract, Kachadorian and co-workers have shown that tissues stimulated with adenosine 3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (cAMP) or forskolin have a lower Pf than would be anticipated from the frequency of aggregates visualized on the flat portion of the luminal membrane using freeze-fracture electron microscopy. We report here measurements of Pf/Pd(w) for the luminal membrane of tissues receiving these agents: Pf/Pd(w) for submaximally stimulated tissues was the same, regardless of whether the stimulant was vasopressin (12.7 +/- 0.3), forskolin (13.7 +/- 0.9), or cAMP (12.0 +/- 1.3). The calculated Pd(w)'s for the series barrier were also identical (6.8 +/- 0.5, 6.5 +/- 0.3, and 8.2 +/- 1.0 X 10(-4) cm/s respectively). Our data, taken together with those of Kachadorian et al. are consistent with a number of possibilities: because our methodology does not permit estimation of Pf for the series barrier, we cannot rule out the possibility of a "post-luminal barrier" that is rate-limiting for Pf, but not for Pd(w) in forskolin- and cAMP-stimulated tissues, Pf and Pd(w) of the luminal surface aggregates could decrease in parallel, so that luminal membrane Pf/Pd(w) remains constant, and there could be a diminished frequency of fused aggregate-rich aggrephores, but not of aggregates that are on the flat portion of the luminal membrane. Only the latter can be unequivocally quantitated using freeze-fracture electron microscopy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online