» Articles » PMID: 2143894

Control of Glycolysis in Cultured Chick Embryo Hepatocytes. Fructose 2,6-bisphosphate Content and Phosphofructokinase-1 Activity Are Stimulated by Insulin and Epidermal Growth Factor

Overview
Journal Biochem J
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 1990 Aug 1
PMID 2143894
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Chick embryo hepatocytes were maintained in monolayer culture in a serum-free chemically defined medium for periods of up to 2 days. Over this time period, insulin provoked selective increases (up to 5-fold) in factors relevant to the control of glycolysis: the activities of phosphofructokinase-1 (PFK-1), phosphofructokinase-2 (PFK-2) and hexokinase isoenzymes and the content of fructose 2,6-bisphosphate (F26BP). Half-maximal effects of insulin on pFK-1 activity were in the physiological range (0.1 nM). Changes in enzyme activities and F26BP content in response to insulin were correlated with stimulation of glycolytic flux as estimated by radioisotopic flux. These data are discussed in relation to known changes which occur in hepatic glycolytic activity and PFK-1 activity in the intact chick around hatching. The effects of insulin on F26BP content, PFK-1 activity and glycolytic flux were mimicked by epidermal growth factor (EGF). In contrast, phorbol esters produced minimal actions on any of the above parameters. Our data indicate that protein kinase C is not involved in the actions of insulin or EGF in control of F26BP content or PFK-1 activity. This work indicates that the related tyrosyl kinase receptors of insulin and EGF may provoke identical responses within hepatocytes, but through the utilization of different transduction systems which merge to common control points.

Citing Articles

Variable protein homeostasis in housekeeping and non-housekeeping pathways under mycotoxins stress.

Sun Y, Wen J, Chen R, Deng Y Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1):7819.

PMID: 31127180 PMC: 6534621. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-44305-0.


Aegle marmelos differentially affects hepatic markers of glycolysis, insulin signalling pathway, hypoxia, and inflammation in HepG2 cells grown in fructose versus glucose-rich environment.

Aggarwal H, Nair J, Sharma P, Sehgal R, Naeem U, Rajora P Mol Cell Biochem. 2017; 438(1-2):1-16.

PMID: 28766170 DOI: 10.1007/s11010-017-3108-8.


SREBP isoform and SREBP target gene expression during rat primary hepatocyte culture.

Wu J, Dickson A In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. 2010; 46(8):657-63.

PMID: 20568021 DOI: 10.1007/s11626-010-9321-3.


Dynamics of the cellular metabolome during human cytomegalovirus infection.

Munger J, Bajad S, Coller H, Shenk T, Rabinowitz J PLoS Pathog. 2006; 2(12):e132.

PMID: 17173481 PMC: 1698944. DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.0020132.


6-phosphofructo-2-kinase/fructose-2,6-bisphosphatase: head-to-head with a bifunctional enzyme that controls glycolysis.

Rider M, Bertrand L, Vertommen D, Michels P, Rousseau G, Hue L Biochem J. 2004; 381(Pt 3):561-79.

PMID: 15170386 PMC: 1133864. DOI: 10.1042/BJ20040752.


References
1.
Silpananta P, GOODRIDGE A . Synthesis and degradation of malic enzyme in chick liver. J Biol Chem. 1971; 246(18):5754-61. View

2.
Burton K . A study of the conditions and mechanism of the diphenylamine reaction for the colorimetric estimation of deoxyribonucleic acid. Biochem J. 1956; 62(2):315-23. PMC: 1215910. DOI: 10.1042/bj0620315. View

3.
URETA T, Reichberg S, Radojkovic J, Slebe J . Comparative studies on glucose phosphorylating isoenzymes of vertebrates. IV. Chromatographic profiles of hexokinases from the liver of several avian species. Comp Biochem Physiol B. 1973; 45(2):445-61. DOI: 10.1016/0305-0491(73)90076-x. View

4.
GOODRIDGE A, Garay A, Silpananta P . Regulation of lipogenesis and the total activities of lipogenic enzymes in a primary culture of hepatocytes from prenatal and early postnatal chicks. J Biol Chem. 1974; 249(5):1469-75. View

5.
Dunaway Jr G, Weber G . Effects of hormonal and nutritional changes on rates of synthesis and degradation of hepatic phosphofructokinase isozymes. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1974; 162(2):629-37. DOI: 10.1016/0003-9861(74)90225-2. View