HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 279, Issue 26, 26939-26947, June 25, 2004

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 279/26/26939    most recent M401143200v1 Submit a Letter to Editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ji, H.-L. Articles by Benos, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ji, H.-L. Articles by Benos, D. J. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Degenerin Sites Mediate Proton Activation of -Epithelial Sodium Channel^*

Hong-Long Ji and Dale J. Benos

From the Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0005

Received for publication, February 2, 2004 , and in revised form, April 14, 2004.

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
The -subunit of epithelial Na⁺ channels (ENaC) is predominately expressed in brain, heart, and pancreas. The amiloride sensitivity, Na⁺ conductance, and critical domains for gating are characterized as a cross between proton-activated Na⁺ channels and -ENaC. The hypothesis that external protons may activate human -ENaC was addressed by expressing -hENaC in Xenopus oocytes and evaluating proton-activated current with the two-electrode voltage clamp technique. Our results showed that protons transiently evoked a Na⁺ current with an EC₅₀ of pH 6 overlapped on the basal current of -hENaC. Proton-activated current was not observed in uninjected oocytes. Studies on gating kinetics revealed that activation, desensitization, and recovery times of proton-activated Na⁺ current were 3.8 ± 0.5 s, 253 ± 9.5 s, and 10 ± 3.6 s, respectively (n = 4–12). Alkali metal cation selectivity of the proton-activated current was identical to that of the basal current of -hENaC. The metabolic acids, lactate, pyruvate, and formate, modified the proton-activated current, as did hypo-osmotic stress. EDTA, hypo-osmolarity, and lactate enhanced proton activation synergistically. Our results suggest that -hENaC subunit is essential for proton-activated current and -subunit may potentially regulate the response of -hENaC to protons. We have concluded that -hENaC is a proton-activated cation channel whose closing gate can be regulated by a proton-induced conformational change. Proton-sensitivity of -hENaC may be an important mechanism for integrating external ischemic signals in inflamed and hypoxic tissues.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Acidosis is very common under physiological and pathological conditions. Systematic acidosis, including respiratory and metabolic acid-base disorders, increases the extracellular proton concentrations throughout the body. Local hypoxia, inflammation, and ischemia generally lead to accumulation of metabolic acids, resulting in a pH decrease of the extracellular fluid. On the other hand, a pH drop is also a normal physiological occurrence. For example, external and cellular pH changes happen by the H⁺ ion and neurotransmitter translocation.

-subunit of epithelial sodium channels (ENaCs)¹ belongs to the ENaC/degenerin superfamily, which was originally identified in Caenorhabditis elegans and colonic epithelia. So far, five isoforms of the ENaC branch of this superfamily have been identified. When -ENaC is expressed in oocytes, channels with low amiloride sensitivity, more Na⁺ permeability over Li⁺, and a unitary Na⁺ conductance of 12 pS resulted (1, 2). -ENaC is originally cloned from human kidney epithelial cells and also distributes in both epithelial tissues (i.e. pancreas, lung, testis, and ovary, etc.) and non-epithelial cells (i.e. astrocytes, cardiovascular cells, neurons, and skeletal muscles). - and -ENaC subunits have been found in lung (3, 4), testis (2, 5), and astrocytes (6). Tissue distribution of -ENaC subunit mostly matches that of the proton-activated Na⁺ channels (ASIC), another member of the ENaC/degenerin superfamily. Location of these channels in non-epithelial tissues may reflect a function and regulation of -ENaC as distinct and diverse as its epithelial counterpart, namely -ENaC subunit.

There is ample evidence of regulation of native amiloride-sensitive Na⁺ conductance in epithelial tissues and cloned ENaC by external pH. Ussing (7) found in 1949 that the short circuit current of frog skin decreased when external pH was below 5. Comparable findings were reported by several groups (8–10), and these observations were verified by Rousseau and Sladen (11) and Chung and Johnson (12) in mammalian epithelia. In contrast, a stimulation of amiloride-sensitive Na⁺ conductance in frog skin was observed as external pH declined (13–15). Recently, Chalfant et al. (16) reported that external acidic pH (pH 6.4) did not have any effect on rat -ENaC (rENaC) expressed in oocytes when examined by the two-electrode voltage clamp and cell-free planar lipid bilayer assays. Zhang et al. (17) found with cell-attached patches that only the -rENaC channel (and not -rENaC) was down-regulated by external acidic pH. Acidic pH elevated the apical Na⁺ conductance in A6 cells within the first hour but decreased -rENaC activity expressed in oocytes following a slight transient rise (18). However, little is known about the effects of external protons on cloned -hENaC (19, 20).

The similarities in cation selectivity, amiloride affinity, and tissue location of -ENaC and ASIC channels prompted us to test the hypothesis that -ENaC is activated by external protons. This idea has been addressed by co-expressing -hENaC with human -subunits in Xenopus oocytes and measuring the effects of protons on -hENaC channel activity.

	MATERIALS AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
cRNA Preparation—cRNA for human -, -, and -ENaC (hENaC) and their degenerin mutants were prepared as previously described (1, 2, 21, 22). Site-directed degenerin mutants of S526F, S520F, and S529F hENaC were created with the Chameleon double-stranded mutagenesis kit (Stratagene) and sequenced. Transcription and in vitro translation were performed as described previously (23).

Oocyte Expression and Whole-cell Assay—A detailed description of this technique has been previously published (24). In brief, defolliculated oocytes were cytosolically injected with wild type and mutant hENaCs in 50 nl of RNase free water/oocyte of cRNA and incubated in half-strength L-15 medium. Whole-cell cation currents were measured by the two-electrode voltage clamp technique. Oocytes were impaled with two electrodes having resistances of 0.5–2 M when filled with 3 M KCl. A TEV 200 voltage clamp amplifier was used to clamp oocytes with concomitant recording of currents. Two reference electrodes were connected to the bath. Sampling protocols were given by pCLAMP 8.0, and current at –60 mV was simultaneously monitored with a chart recorder. The control superfusate was ND96 (in mM: 96 NaCl, 1 MgCl₂, 1.8 CaCl₂, 2 KCl, and 5 HEPES, pH 7.5). Superfusate with pH 6 or below was buffered with MES. pH was adjusted with NaOH and HCl. Na salt was replaced with equal molar Li⁺, K⁺, and Cs⁺ for ion selectivity determination. Current-voltage relationships were acquired by stepping the holding potential in 20-mV increments from –120 to +80 mV after the monitoring currents were stable, with and without application of amiloride. To test the effects of hypo-osmolarity, extracellular divalent cations, lactate, and their combinations on the proton-activated -ENaC current, 40 mM NaCl (ND-40) was included in the bath solution (80 mosM) and mannitol was used to prepare the corresponding iso-osmotic medium (200 mosM). 5 mM EDTA or EGTA and 15 mM lactate were added.

Data were sampled at the rate of 1 kHz and filtered at 500 kHz. Because most proton-activated channels have fast activation and desensitization times of up to few seconds, pH switching was controlled by a SF-77B perfusion fast step system (Warner Instrument Corp., Hamden, CT) to deliver solutions with neutral or acidic pH to a tiny chamber with a 0.1-ml volume.

Data Analysis—Proton-activated Na⁺ current was computed by subtracting the basal current from the peak current in the presence of protons. The activation time constant (_a) and desensitization time constant (_d) were calculated by fitting the current trace of activation and decay with the built-in first order exponential function of CLAMP-FIT 9. The fitted curves are depicted in Fig. 5. Recovery time (_rec) was calculated by fitting the fraction of proton-activated Na⁺ currents as a function of time interval between proton applications.

View larger version (32K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 5. Gating and ion selectivity of proton-activated Na+ current. A, activation (a) and desensitization (d) time constants. Gating rate was estimated by fitting activated and inactivated traces with first order exponential function as indicated by fitting curves. Trace represents twelve experiments. B, recovery time constant (n = 8). Proton-activated Na+ currents were elicited in the same cells by various intervals (0, 5, 10, 15, and 25 s) at pH 4.0. The ratio of proton-activated current (I) evoked within an interval of <25 s and that with an interval of 25 s (Imax) was plotted as a function of time between each application of acidic solution with pH 4.0. C, representative Na+ current traces stepped from –120 to + 80 mV. D, current-voltage relationships for basal (circle) and proton-activated (square) Na+ currents (n = 5). Arrow indicates reversal potential. E, average amplitude of basal and proton-activated current at –60 mV elicited by pH 4.0 (n = 8).

(Eq. 1)

where I_Na is the proton-activated current, I_max is the maximal acid-activated current, pH_o stands for the extraoocyte pH, EC₅₀ represents the value of pH_o that results in half the maximal current of the ASIC channel, and n is the Hill coefficient.

All results are presented as mean ± S.E. One-way analysis of variance computation combined with the Bonferroni test was used to analyze data with unequal variance between each group. A significance level of 0.05 was employed.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Activation of -hENaC by Protons—To address the question of whether or not -hENaC is activated by external protons, human -ENaC was expressed in Xenopus oocytes with various compositions and acidic pH 4 was applied by a rapid perfusion system that has been successfully used to study ASIC currents (24). Fig. 1A shows a current trace elicited in an oocyte expressing -subunit alone. Acidic external pH 4.0 activated -ENaC-associated Na⁺ current at –60 mV. The proton-activated Na⁺ current was not observed in uninjected oocytes; instead, protons decreased the background current of oocytes contributed by endogenous anion and cation channels (Fig. 1B). Proton-activated current levels of -(–42.0 ± 12 nA, n = 8) and -hENaC channels (–55 ± 11 nA, n = 8) were not markedly different from that of -subunit alone (–50 ± 16 nA, n = 9). In contrast, the proton-activated Na⁺ current of -hENaC was 44-fold greater (–1886.5 ± 269 nA, n = 35) than that of -ENaC itself (Fig. 1B). An EC₅₀ of 6.0 ± 0.03 for proton activation on -hENaC alone was retrieved by fitting the dose-response curve (Fig. 1C, n = 11). A similar observation expressed in oocytes has just been reported (25). Although the proton-activated current can be elicited in oocytes expressing -ENaC, it is too small for systematic study of its properties. Therefore, we amplified the -ENaC current magnitude by co-expressing -hENaC subunits based on the fact that there is no difference between the basic features of - and -hENaC channels (2).

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 1. Proton activation of -ENaC channels with various subunit compositions. A, a representative current trace of -ENaC alone at –60 mV. B, average current amplitude of proton-activated Na+ currents in uninjected oocytes (H2O), oocytes expressing -, -, -, and -hENaC channels. Cell number is shown for each group in brackets. C, pH dependence of external protons on -ENaC itself (n = 11).

View larger version (26K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 2. Proton-activated Na+ current in oocytes expressing -hENaC. A, a representative current trace of basal and proton-activated Na+ current associated with -hENaC recorded at –60 mV. Delivery of perfusates, amiloride, and protons is indicated. B, average peak proton-activated Na+ current in uninjected oocytes, associated with -hENaC, in the absence of extraoocyte Na+ (NMDG), and in the presence of amiloride (10 µM). Number in parentheses is oocytes-tested. *, p <0.01 compared with -ENaC. C, representative traces of proton-activated Na+ current evoked with various external pH. These traces were digitized from a single oocyte expressing -hENaC. Proton-activated current was calculated as the difference of basal current (indicated by dotted line) and the peak current stimulated by protons. D, dose-response curve of proton-activated Na+ current plotted with average data from eight experiments. Imax is the proton-activated Na+ current activated by pH 4.0.

The response of rat and human -ENaC expressed in oocytes to external protons was also determined with the same protocol. Superfusion of oocytes with a solution at pH 4.0 decreased human -ENaC current (Fig. 3A). Similar results were obtained in oocytes expressing the rat -ENaC channel (not shown). Interestingly, in the absence of an external Na⁺ ion, an inward current was activated at pH 4.0 as observed in oocytes expressing -hENaC (Fig. 2A). In contrast to -hENaC, the basal current of -hENaC was significantly down-regulated by external protons (Fig. 3B), suggesting that the responses to protons between - and -hENaC are different (19).

View larger version (21K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 3. Proton-activated -hENaC channel activity. A, a representative current trace elicited at –60 mV. Application times of amiloride (10 µM), acidic solution (pH 4.0), and Na+-free media (NMDG) are indicated. B, average current magnitude at neutral (7.5) and acidic pH (4.0). Membrane potential was –60 mV. N represents oocytes examined. *, p < 0.05 when compared with the current at pH 7.5.

View larger version (30K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 4. Intraoocyte pH on proton-activated Na+ current of -hENaC. A, a representative proton-activated current trace in the presence of 20 mM Na acetate, which decreases intraoocyte pH. B, average results of basal and proton-activated current from five experiments. *, p < 0.05 compared with currents of -ENaC.

Ionic Selectivity of Proton-activated Current—To answer the question of whether the proton-activated current of -hENaC has the same selectivity as the basal current, cation selectivity for basal and proton-activated currents was determined simultaneously. Fig. 5C shows representative traces of basal and proton-activated Na⁺ currents at potentials stepped from –120 to +80 mV. Their current-voltage relationship revealed an identical reversal potential (+40 mV), indicating that basal and proton-activated currents are both predominately Na⁺-permeable (Fig. 5D).

Whole-cell basal and proton-activated currents for -hENaC-expressing oocytes bathed in solutions having an alkali-metal cation different from Na⁺ were measured and summarized in Fig. 5E. These experiments revealed that proton-activated Li⁺ current is smaller than Na⁺ current, consistent with the findings for the basal current (1, 2). Estimated from the whole-cell current, the cation selectivity ratio in the order of Na⁺/Li⁺/K⁺/Cs⁺ for the basal current (1/0.7/0.04/0.07) was similar to that of the proton-activated current (1/0.5/0.04/0.1).

Protons Modify the Closing Gate via Conformational Change— Two channel gates formed by separate pre-H1 and pre-H2 domains have been proposed in ENaC channels (28–30). Mutating a degenerin site located in the pre-H2 domain (pore region) added a basal current to ASIC channels (31). Similar to ENaC, the basal current of degenerin-mutated ASIC channels was sensitive to amiloride and impermeable to K⁺. To explore the idea that protons may stimulate the basal current of -hENaC by modifying a closing gate, three degenerin mutants, S526F, S520F, and S529F, were engineered and injected into oocytes with their conjugate wild type partners.

Fig. 6A shows representative proton-activated Na⁺ current traces evoked with pH 4.0. Either S526F or S529F alone resulted in the loss of total proton-activated Na⁺ current; in some cases, the response was reversed (Fig. 6B). S520F likewise diminished the proton-activated current to 34.6% of the wild type response (p <0.05). In the case of co-expressing three degenerin mutants together, there were no basal and proton-activated currents in oocytes 3 days postinjection of S526F, S520F, and S529F (data not shown). These oocytes had resting membrane potential identical to those of uninjected oocytes (from –30 to –60 mV).

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 6. Proton-activated current associated with degenerin mutants. A, representative current traces for wild type and degenerin mutatant constructs of -hENaC evoked with pH 4.0. B, average proton-induced current (n = 58). *, p < 0.01 compared with wt -hENaC.

Metabolic Acids and Hypotonicity Facilitate Proton-activated Current—The postulated physiological relevance for ASIC channels includes transduction of acid-mediated pain, mechanical stretch, and temperature (27). Even though metabolic acids generally take several minutes to produce a significant drop of external pH, it is reasonable to hypothesize ASIC as an integrator of all the aforementioned stimuli. To test the hypothesis that acidic metabolites facilitate proton-activated Na⁺ current associated with -hENaC, proton-activated current of -hENaC was evaluated in the presence and absence of lactate, pyruvate, and formate in an acidic superfusate.

As shown in Fig. 7, 15 mM lactate nearly doubled proton-activated Na⁺ current. Pyruvate and formate facilitated activation of protons on -hENaC less, but their effects were statistically significant. As observed by Immke and McClesky (33), even 20-mM acidic metabolites still cannot reach the saturating level of stimulated current. Continuing to increase acidic metabolite concentration leads to marked changes in osmolarity and pH. This prohibited us from determining the EC₅₀ of each acidic metabolite for the proton-activated current.

View larger version (32K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 7. Augmentation of proton-activated current by metabolic acids, hypo-osmolarity, and EDTA. Representative traces at –60 mV before and after addition of 15 mM pyruvate (A), lactate (B), and formate (C). D, average current levels with and without metabolic acids (n = 6). E, combination of divalent cations, hypo-osmolarity, and lactate on proton-activated current. The recording was started with iso-osmotic (Iso) ND-40 and switched to hypo-osmotic solutions with either 1.8 mM (Hypo) or 0 mM CaCl2 (Hypo+0Ca) and then to a hypo-osmotic solution with lactate in the absence (Hypo+Lact) and presence of 5 mM EDTA (Hypo+EDTA+Lact) or EGTA (Hypo+EGTA+Lact). *, p < 0.05, **, p < 0.01 compared with wild type -ENaC with isotonic solution.

Several publications have reported that gating of ASIC channels by extracellular protons is regulated by intracellular and extracellular Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺ (33, 36, 37). To test the hypothesis that extracellular divalent cations regulate the proton-activated current of -ENaC, we pretreated oocytes for 30 min with the membrane-permeable Ca²⁺ chelator, BAPTA_AM (50 µM), in the absence of extracellular Ca²⁺. The proton-activated peak current associated with -ENaC was not significantly affected either by pretreatment with BAPTA_AM (control: –2016 ± 125 nA versus BAPTA_AM: –1726.3 ± 335.4 nA, n = 8, p >0.05) or by removal of bath Ca²⁺ (1.8 mM: –1573.3 ± 154 nA versus 0 mM: –1696.7 ± 173 nA, n = 8, p >0.05). However, EDTA, but not EGTA, can augment the response to hypotonicity and lactate up to 2.5-fold (Fig. 7E). In the presence of both EDTA and lactate, the increased proton-activated current was stably elicited by repeated application of acidic solution, whereas the increment of proton-activated current with either hypotonicity or lactate ran down in a few minutes, These results indicate that the extracellular Ca²⁺/Mg²⁺ ratio rather than Ca²⁺ alone affects the proton-induced current of -hENaC.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Our results indicate that -ENaC is activated by extracellular protons. Proton activation of -ENaC current is removed by degenerin mutations, leading to a conformational change as well as a decrease in closing time. Ion selectivity of the proton-activated -hENaC current was identical to that of the basal current, suggesting that an unaltered channel pore is used for both processes. Regulation of the proton-activated current of -ENaC by hypo-osmolarity and EDTA suggested that -ENaC may integrate ischemia-related signals. In epithelial tissue, -ENaC may combine with -ENaC subunits to regulate salt and water balance across the epithelium under hypoxic conditions. In non-epithelial tissues, -ENaC may share physiological function with proton-activated channels in the transduction of acidosis, stretch, and other ischemia-induced signals.

Mechanisms for Proton-activated Conductance—Amiloride sensitivity and alkali metal salt permeabilities of proton-activated current in oocytes expressing -ENaC exclude the involvement of endogenous cation channels. MES and Hepes pH buffers are membrane-impermeable, and Na⁺ substitution eliminated proton-activated currents more than 80%, so it is unlikely that the acid-activated current is carried by protons. However, external proton-induced inward currents of - and -hENaC channels in the absence of bath sodium indicate that ENaC channels may be slightly permeable to H⁺ ion (38). A second line of evidence comes from examination of the effect of intracellular protons on basal and proton-activated currents (Fig. 2). Intracellular acidosis, instead of enhancing proton-activated current, abolished it gradually over minutes. A similar response to external protons was not observed in uninjected oocytes and in oocytes expressing -ENaC, further confirming that activation of -ENaC by protons is specific.

Fast activation kinetics suggested that protons may not activate -ENaC by recruiting new channel proteins from a subplasma membrane channel pool. Trafficking and internalizing measurements of ENaC in oocytes revealed that these processes generally occurred in minutes or even hours (39). It is well known that unitary conductance is not altered when co-expressed with -ENaC; an increased open probability, then, may mediate pH activation of -ENaC. As reported by Kellenberger et al. (40), only 10% of ENaC channels located at the plasma membrane can be detected electrically at any given time. Thus, another mechanism of proton activation is that acidic pH values increase the percentage of active ENaC channels.

It is not surprising to see that the pH sensitivity of -ENaC is identical to that of -ENaC. Several groups have found that -like ENaC, including -, -, and -ENaC, exhibits the same biophysical properties as those of channels co-expressed with -subunits. Co-expression of -ENaC did not influence ion selectivity, amiloride sensitivity, or conductance. However, mutagenesis revealed domains in -ENaC as well as in -ENaC that affect self-inhibition and amiloride sensitivity (41, 42). Our results confirmed that activation of protons is mainly mediated by the degenerin site of - and -subunits. Because -ENaC alone was activated by protons, and neither regulatory subunit - nor -ENaC co-expression increased the proton-activated Na⁺ current (Fig. 1B), -ENaC may potentially regulate the response of -subunit to protons as revealed by degenerin site mutations (Fig. 6).

Although proton activation on -ENaC requires the presence of a degenerin site, protons may not interact with this residue directly. Serine is not a proton-sensitive amino acid, and an identical site in -rENaC showed a different response to protons. On the other hand, the gating kinetics of proton-activated current associated with -ENaC is reminiscent of the acid-activated current produced by a degenerin mutant, namely, G430F-ASIC1a (24). The response of G430F-ASIC1a to protons excluded the interaction of protons with the degenerin site. Instead, the pKa of the His residue (6.0) is identical to the EC₅₀ of protons activating - and -ENaC currents (Figs. 1C and 2D). Glu and Asp amino acid residues showing a pKa close to 4.0 may also contribute to the stimulatory effect of protons on -ENaC. Our results support the view that protons titrate pH-sensitive residues in the extracellular loop, leading to a conformational change of channel protein and then causing an action on the closing gate mimicking that of ASIC. Yamamura et al. (25) very recently reported an EC₅₀ of 5.0 for -hENaC expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells, which differs from our observation (6.0) in oocytes. Inconsistent expression systems and time required for recovery between every proton exposure may contribute to this diversity.

As we mentioned before, there are 26 His, 11 Asp, and 22 Glu amino acid residues located in the extracellular loop of -ENaC that are potential proton regulatory sites. Amiloride at micromolar concentration may not be able to shield all of these 59 acid-sensitive residues in total. Instead, protons may bind to these regulatory sites and lead to a conformational change of ENaC proteins and finally stimulate channel activity. Based on our observations as shown in Figs. 1 and 2, protons may not competitively bind to the out mouth of the channel with amiloride and Na⁺. Two amiloride binding sites in the extracellular domain of ENaC have been identified (1, 44). Amiloride binding most likely prevents the conformational change resulting from acidic external pH and/or blocks Na⁺ entry through the channel pore.

Protons may not influence the coordination and interactions of ENaC subunits. A body of evidence demonstrated that both - and -ENaC subunits amplify the current amplitude of - and -ENaC (2, 22). The current density of and channels is approximately as low as that formed by -subunit alone (22). Regardless of subunit composition, no studies showed that changes in subunit ratio, normally 2:1:1 or 3:3:3, regulate ENaC channel activity.

Proton-activated ENaC as an Integrator of Ischemia-related Signals—Predominate expression of -ENaC in heart and brain implies that the functions of this isoform may differ from those distributing at epithelial tissues (2). pH sensitivity of -ENaC led us to hypothesize that -ENaC may serve as a pH sensor by itself or as an element of a proton receptor complex in excitable cells. Lactic acid, pyruvic acid, and formatic acid are generally produced during cardiac and brain ischemia and result in acidosis within minutes (45–47).

Lactate, pyruvate, and formate may accumulate in cytosol via their transporters, which results in intracellular acidification and elevation of Ca²⁺ (48–50). However, intracellular acidification and BAPTA treatment do not support the idea that these metabolic acids cytosolically enhance proton activation on -ENaC; instead, they potentiate -ENaC, possibly by chelating extracellular divalent cations. A similar mechanism has been proposed to explain potentiation of proton-gated Na⁺ channels by lactate in ischemia-sensing neurons (33, 43, 51). Facilitation of proton-activated current by these acidic metabolites strongly indicates that -ENaC is most likely involved in ischemic signal transduction. Not unique, this phenomenon has also been reported in ischemia-sensing neurons (33).

Membrane stretch occurs after a decrease in osmolarity of extracellular fluid during brain and heart stroke (34, 35). A potentiation of the proton-activated -ENaC current was observed following a hypotonic challenge (Fig. 7E). Generally, both hypotonic stress and removal of extracellular Ca²⁺ have been proved to cause an increment in cytosolic Ca²⁺. However, BAPTA pretreatment cannot affect the proton-induced current, indicating that cytosolic Ca²⁺ may not play a role in hypotonicity-facilitated current. A significant rise in the proton-induced current by hypotonic medium with 1.8 mM, but not in the absence of external Ca²⁺, suggests that external Ca²⁺ regulates -ENaC in a dose-dependent pattern or Ca²⁺ exerts two separate effects. A dual effect of external Ca²⁺ on ASIC channel has also been observed (36).

The diverse action of hypotonicity in the presence and absence of extraoocyte Ca²⁺ implies that external Mg²⁺ may also be involved in modification of proton activation. Additional supportive evidence comes from EDTA and EGTA application in the presence of external Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺. EGTA is a specific chelator of Ca²⁺, whereas EDTA is a chelator for both Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺. The facilitating effects of EDTA and EGTA on proton-induced current are inconsistent, indicating that not only Ca²⁺ itself but also the Ca²⁺/Mg²⁺ ratio regulate proton activation on -ENaC. Taken together, enhancement of proton-activated current by hypo-osmolarity, decreased extracellular divalent cation, or a combination of acidic metabolites further suggest that -ENaC may integrate ischemia-related signals as well as ASIC channels (43).

Potential Impact—In brain and heart, acidic metabolites can produce a fall of more than one pH unit in few minutes poststroke (45, 46). ASIC channels are thought to be activated to transduct ischemia-related signals. However, the process of pH fall generally requires minutes to develop. The millisecond activation of ASIC may be an additional limitation for them as effective pH sensors. Compared with ASIC channels, -ENaC is distinguished by a very slow activation and desensitization process, allowing ischemic cells to have enough time to detect changes in proton concentration and osmolarity. Another striking feature of -ENaC is its slow desensitization. The ASIC channel generally desensitized in less than a second (31), whereas -ENaC took minutes. Thus, the gating properties of -ENaC indicated that it is an ischemic sensor different from ASIC channels.

	FOOTNOTES

 
^* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants DK37206 and DK56095. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

To whom correspondence should be addressed: 1918 University Blvd., 844 MCLM, Birmingham, AL 35294-0005. Tel.: 205-934-3758; Fax: 205-934-1445; E-mail: ji{at}physiology.uab.edu.

¹ The abbreviations used are: ENaC, epithelial sodium channel; hENaC, human ENaC; rENaC, rat ENaC; ASIC, proton-gated sodium channel; BAPTA_AM, 1,2-bis(2-aminophenoxy)ethane-N,N,N'N'-tetraacetic acid tetrakis(acetoxymethyl easter); MES, 4-morpholineethanesulfonic acid.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank Dr. Michel Lazdunski (Institut de Pharmacologie Moleculaire et Cellulaire, Valbonne, France) for the gift of human -ENaC cDNA and Dr. Michael J. Welsh (University of Iowa) for -ENaC clones.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Ji, H. L., Bishop, L. R., Anderson, S. J., Fuller, C. M., and Benos, D. J. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 8428–8440[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Waldmann, R., Champigny, G., Bassilana, F., Voilley, N., and Lazdunski, M. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 27411–27414[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Lazrak, A., and Matalon, S. (2003) Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell Mol. Physiol. 285, L443–L450[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Lazrak, A., Samanta, A., and Matalon, S. (2000) Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell Mol. Physiol. 278, L848–L857[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Bertog, M., Smith, D. J., Bielfeld-Ackermann, A., Bassett, J., Ferguson, D. J., Korbmacher, C., and Harris, A. (2000) Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 278, C885–C894[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Berdiev, B. K., Xia, J., McLean, L. A., Markert, J. M., Gillespie, G. Y., Mapstone, T. B., Naren, A. P., Jovov, B., Bubien, J. K., Ji, H. L., Fuller, C. M., Kirk, K. L., and Benos, D. J. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 15023–15034[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Ussing, H. H. (1949) Acta Physiol. Scandinav. 17, 1–37
8. Cuthbert, A. W. (1976) Mol. Pharmacol. 12, 945–957[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Funder, J., Ussing, H. H., and Wieth, J. O. (1967) Acta Physiol. Scand. 71, 65–76[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
10. Mandel, L. J. (1978) Am. J. Physiol. 235, C35–C48[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Rousseau, B., and Sladen, G. E. (1971) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 233, 591–593[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
12. Chung, R. S., and Johnson, G. M. (1977) Surg. Forum 28, 435–437[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
13. Leaf, A., Keller, A., and Dempsey, E. (1964) Am. J. Physiol. 207, 547–552[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Grinstein, S., Candia, O., and Erlij, D. (1978) J. Membr. Biol. 40, 261–280[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
15. Li, J. H.-Y. (1981) Adv. Physiol. Sci. 3, 151–155
16. Chalfant, M. L., Denton, J. S., Berdiev, B. K., Ismailov, I. I., Benos, D. J., and Stanton, B. A. (1999) Am. J. Physiol. 276, C477–C486[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
17. Zhang, P., Fyfe, G. K., Grichtchenko, I. I., and Canessa, C. M. (1999) Biophys. J. 77, 3043–3051[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Awayda, M. S., Boudreaux, M. J., Reger, R. L., and Hamm, L. L. (2000) Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 279, C1896–C1905[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19. Ji, H. L., Copeland, S. J., Bishop, L. R., Fuller, C. M., and Benos, D. J. (2003) Biophys. J. 84, 529a
20. Ji, H. L., Copeland, S. J., Waldmann, R., Fuller, C. M., Lazdunski, M. L., and Benos, D. L. (2003) FASEB J. 17, 913a
21. Langloh, A. L., Berdiev, B., Ji, H. L., Keyser, K., Stanton, B. A., and Benos, D. J. (2000) Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 278, C277–C291[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. McDonald, F. J., Price, M. P., Snyder, P. M., and Welsh, M. J. (1995) Am. J. Physiol. 268, C1157–C1163[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Ji, H. L., Parker, S., Langloh, A. L., Fuller, C. M., and Benos, D. J. (2001) Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol. 281, C64–C74[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Ji, H. L., Jovov, B., Fu, J., Bishop, L. R., Mebane, H. C., Fuller, C. M., Stanton, B. A., and Benos, D. J. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 8395–8405[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Yamamura, H., Ugawa, S., Ueda, T., Nagao, M., and Shimada, S. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 12529–12534[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Palmer, L. G. (2001) J. Membr. Biol. 184, 305–311[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Waldmann, R., and Lazdunski, M. (1998) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 8, 418–424[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
28. Grunder, S., Jaeger, N. F., Gautschi, I., Schild, L., and Rossier, B. C. (1999) Pflugers Arch. Eur. J. Physiol. 438, 709–715[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
29. Grunder, S., Firsov, D., Chang, S. S., Jaeger, N. F., Gautschi, I., Schild, L., Lifton, R. P., and Rossier, B. C. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 899–907[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
30. Kellenberger, S., Gautschi, I., and Schild, L. (2002) J. Physiol. 543, 413–424[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Waldmann, R., Champigny, G., Lingueglia, E., De Weille, J. R., Heurteaux, C., and Lazdunski, M. (1999) Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 868, 67–76[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
32. Maroto, R., and Hamill, O. P. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 23867–23872[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Immke, D. C., and McCleskey, E. W. (2001) Nat. Neurosci. 4, 869–870[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
34. Hansen, A. J. (1985) Physiol. Rev. 65, 101–148[Free Full Text]
35. Walz, W., Klimaszewski, A., and Paterson, I. A. (1993) Dev. Neurosci. 15, 216–225[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36. de Weille, J., and Bassilana, F. (2001) Brain Res. 900, 277–281[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
37. Waldmann, R., Champigny, G., Bassilana, F., Heurteaux, C., and Lazdunski, M. (1997) Nature 386, 173–177[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
38. Palmer, L. G. (1982) J. Membr. Biol. 67, 91–98[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
39. Rotin, D., Kanelis, V., and Schild, L. (2001) Am. J. Physiol. Renal. Physiol. 281, F391–F399[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40. Kellenberger, S., Gautschi, I., Rossier, B. C., and Schild, L. (1998) J. Clin. Investig. 101, 2741–2750[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
41. Kellenberger, S., Gautschi, I., and Schild, L. (2003) Mol. Pharmacol. 64, 848–856[Abstract/Free Full Text]
42. Sheng, S., Bruns, J. B., and Kleyman, T. R. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 9743–9749[Abstract/Free Full Text]
43. Allen, N. J., and Attwell, D. (2002) J. Physiol. 543, 521–529[Abstract/Free Full Text]
44. Ismailov, I. I., Kieber-Emmons, T., Lin, C., Berdiev, B. K., Shlyonsky, V. G., Patton, H. K., Fuller, C. M., Worrell, R., Zuckerman, J. B., Sun, W., Eaton, D. C., Benos, D. J., and Kleyman, T. R. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 21075–21083[Abstract/Free Full Text]
45. Kraig, R. P., Ferreira-Filho, C. R., and Nicholson, C. (1983) J. Neurophysiol. 49, 831–850[Abstract/Free Full Text]
46. Silver, I. A., and Erecinska, M. (1992) J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 12, 759–772[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
47. Cobbe, S. M., and Poole-Wilson, P. A. (1980) J. Mol. Cell Cardiol. 12, 745–760[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
48. Zima, A. V., Kockskamper, J., Mejia-Alvarez, R., and Blatter, L. A. (2003) J. Physiol. 550, 765–783[Abstract/Free Full Text]
49. Ladilov, Y., Schafer, C., Held, A., Schafer, M., Noll, T., and Piper, H. M. (2000) Cardiovasc. Res. 47, 394–403[Abstract/Free Full Text]
50. Mori, S., Morishima, S., Takasaki, M., and Okada, Y. (2002) Brain Res. 957, 1–11[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
51. Immke, D. C., and McCleskey, E. W. (2003) Neuron 37, 75–84[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. R. Silverman, J. P. de Rivero Vaccari, S. Locovei, F. Qiu, S. K. Carlsson, E. Scemes, R. W. Keane, and G. Dahl The Pannexin 1 Channel Activates the Inflammasome in Neurons and Astrocytes J. Biol. Chem., July 3, 2009; 284(27): 18143 - 18151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Collier and P. M. Snyder Extracellular Protons Regulate Human ENaC by Modulating Na+ Self-inhibition J. Biol. Chem., January 9, 2009; 284(2): 792 - 798. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Lu, F. Echeverri, D. Kalabat, B. Laita, D. S. Dahan, R. D. Smith, H. Xu, L. Staszewski, J. Yamamoto, J. Ling, et al. Small Molecule Activator of the Human Epithelial Sodium Channel J. Biol. Chem., May 2, 2008; 283(18): 11981 - 11994. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. H. Meltzer, N. Kapoor, Y. J. Qadri, S. J. Anderson, C. M. Fuller, and D. J. Benos Heteromeric Assembly of Acid-sensitive Ion Channel and Epithelial Sodium Channel Subunits J. Biol. Chem., August 31, 2007; 282(35): 25548 - 25559. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Sobczak, A. Willing, K. Kusche, N. Bangel, and W.-M. Weber Amiloride-sensitive sodium absorption is different in vertebrates and invertebrates Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol, June 1, 2007; 292(6): R2318 - R2327. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				X. Su, Q. Li, K. Shrestha, E. Cormet-Boyaka, L. Chen, P. R. Smith, E. J. Sorscher, D. J. Benos, S. Matalon, and H.-L. Ji Interregulation of Proton-gated Na+ Channel 3 and Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator J. Biol. Chem., December 1, 2006; 281(48): 36960 - 36968. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Olteanu, B. K. Yoder, W. Liu, M. J. Croyle, E. A. Welty, K. Rosborough, J. M. Wyss, P. D. Bell, L. M. Guay-Woodford, M. O. Bevensee, et al. Heightened epithelial Na+ channel-mediated Na+ absorption in a murine polycystic kidney disease model epithelium lacking apical monocilia Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, April 1, 2006; 290(4): C952 - C963. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H.-L. Ji, X.-F. Su, S. Kedar, J. Li, P. Barbry, P. R. Smith, S. Matalon, and D. J. Benos {delta}-Subunit Confers Novel Biophysical Features to {alpha}beta{gamma}-Human Epithelial Sodium Channel (ENaC) via a Physical Interaction J. Biol. Chem., March 24, 2006; 281(12): 8233 - 8241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. O. Hernandez-Gonzalez, J. Sosnik, J. Edwards, J. J. Acevedo, I. Mendoza-Lujambio, I. Lopez-Gonzalez, I. Demarco, E. Wertheimer, A. Darszon, and P. E. Visconti Sodium and Epithelial Sodium Channels Participate in the Regulation of the Capacitation-associated Hyperpolarization in Mouse Sperm J. Biol. Chem., March 3, 2006; 281(9): 5623 - 5633. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Yamamura, S. Ugawa, T. Ueda, M. Nagao, and S. Shimada Icilin Activates the {delta}-Subunit of the Human Epithelial Na+ Channel Mol. Pharmacol., October 1, 2005; 68(4): 1142 - 1147. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Benos Sensing Tension: Recognizing ENaC as a Stretch Sensor Hypertension, November 1, 2004; 44(5): 616 - 617. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Yamamura, S. Ugawa, T. Ueda, M. Nagao, and S. Shimada Capsazepine Is a Novel Activator of the {delta} Subunit of the Human Epithelial Na+ Channel J. Biol. Chem., October 22, 2004; 279(43): 44483 - 44489. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 279/26/26939    most recent M401143200v1 Submit a Letter to Editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ji, H.-L. Articles by Benos, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ji, H.-L. Articles by Benos, D. J. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?