English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Calcium (Ca 2+ ) and 3’,5’-cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) play a critical role for cardiac excitation-contraction-coupling. Both second messengers are known to interact with each other, for example via Ca 2+ -dependent modulation of phosphodiesterase 1 (PDE1) and adenylyl cyclase 5/6 (AC 5/6) activities, which is supposed to occur especially at the local level in distinct subcellular microdomains. Currently, many studies analyze global and local cAMP signaling and its regulation in resting cardiomyocytes devoid of electrical stimulation. For example, Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) microscopy is a popular approach for visualization of real time cAMP dynamics performed in resting cardiomyocytes to avoid potential contractility-related movement artifacts. However, it is unknown whether such data are comparable with the cell behavior under more physiologically relevant conditions during contraction. Here, we directly compare the cAMP-FRET responses to AC stimulation and PDE inhibition in resting vs. paced adult mouse ventricular cardiomyocytes for both cytosolic and subsarcolemmal microdomains. Interestingly, no significant differences in cAMP dynamics could be detected after β-adrenergic (isoproterenol) stimulation, suggesting low impact of rapidly changing contractile Ca 2+  concentrations on cytosolic cAMP levels associated with AC activation. However, the contribution of the calcium-dependent PDE1, but not of the Ca 2+ -insensitive PDE4, to the regulation of cAMP levels after forskolin stimulation was significantly increased. This increase could be mimicked by pretreatment of resting cells with Ca 2+  elevating agents. Ca 2+  imaging demonstrated significantly higher amplitudes of Ca 2+  transients in forskolin than in isoproterenol stimulated cells, suggesting that forskolin stimulation might lead to stronger activation of PDE1. In conclusion, changes in intracellular Ca 2+  during cardiomyocyte contraction dynamically interact with cAMP levels, especially after strong AC stimulation. The use of resting cells for FRET-based measurements of cAMP can be justified under β-adrenergic stimulation, while the reliable analysis of PDE1 effects may require electric field stimulation.

Interactions of Calcium Fluctuations during Cardiomyocyte Contraction with Real-Time cAMP Dynamics Detected by FRET