Article

A limited role for PI(3,4,5)P3 regulation in controlling skeletal muscle mass in response to resistance exercise.

Division of Molecular Physiology, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, United Kingdom.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.53). 07/2010; 5(7):e11624. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011624
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Since activation of the PI3K/(protein kinase B; PKB/akt) pathway has been shown to alter muscle mass and growth, the aim of this study was to determine whether resistance exercise increased insulin like growth factor (IGF) I/phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) signalling and whether altering PI(3,4,5)P(3) metabolism genetically would increase load induced muscle growth.
Acute and chronic resistance exercise in wild type and muscle specific PTEN knockout mice were used to address the role of PI(3,4,5)P(3) regulation in the development of skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Acute resistance exercise did not increase either IGF-1 receptor phosphorylation or IRS1/2 associated p85. Since insulin/IGF signalling to PI3K was unchanged, we next sought to determine whether inactivation of PTEN played a role in load-induced muscle growth. Muscle specific knockout of PTEN resulted in small but significant increases in heart (PTEN(+/+) = 5.00+/-0.02 mg/g, PTEN(-/-) = 5.50+/-0.09 mg/g), and TA (PTEN(+/+) = 1.74+/-0.04 mg/g, PTEN(-/-) = 1.89 +/-0.03) muscle mass, while the GTN, SOL, EDL and PLN remain unchanged. Following ablation, hypertrophy of the PLN, SOL or EDL muscles was similar between PTEN(-/-) and PTEN(+/+) animals. Even though there were some changes in overload-induced PKB and S6K1 phosphorylation, 1 hr following acute resistance exercise there was no difference in the phosphorylation state of S6K1 Thr389 between genotypes.
These data suggest that physiological loading does not lead to the enhanced activation of the PI3K/PKB/mTORC1 axis and that neither PI3K activation nor PTEN, and by extension PI(3,4,5)P(3) levels, play a significant role in adult skeletal muscle growth.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
338 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The goal of the current work was to profile positive (mTORC1 activation, autocrine/paracrine growth factors) and negative [AMPK, unfolded protein response (UPR)] pathways that might regulate overload-induced mTORC1 activation with the hypothesis that a number of negative regulators of mTORC1 will be engaged during a supra-physiological model of hypertrophy. To achieve this, mTORC1-IRS1/2 signaling, BiP/CHOP/IRE1α, and AMPK activation were determined in rat plantaris muscle following synergist ablation (SA). SA resulted in significant increases in muscle mass of ~4% per day throughout the 21 days of the experiment. The expression of the insulin-like growth factors were high throughout the 21d of overload. However, IGF signaling was limited since IRS1 and 2 were undetectable in the overloaded muscle from day 3 to day 9. The decreases in IRS1/2 protein were paralleled by increases in GRB10(Ser501/503) and S6K1(Thr389) phosphorylation, two mTORC1 targets that can destabilize IRS proteins. PKB(Ser473) phosphorylation was higher from 3-6 days and this was associated with increased TSC2(Thr939) phosphorylation. The phosphorylation of TSC2(Thr1345) (an AMPK site) was also elevated whereas phosphorylation at the other PKB site, Thr(1462), was unchanged at 6d. In agreement with the phosphorylation of Thr(1345), synergist ablation led to activation of α1-AMPK during the initial growth phase, lasting the first 9 days before returning to baseline by day 12. The UPR markers CHOP and BiP were elevated over the first 12 days following ablation, whereas IRE1α levels decreased. These data suggest that during supra-physiological muscle loading, at least three potential molecular brakes engage to down-regulate mTORC1.
    AJP Endocrinology and Metabolism 06/2014; · 4.09 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Very few sports use only endurance or strength. Outside of running long distances on a flat surface and power-lifting, practically all sports require some combination of endurance and strength. Endurance and strength can be developed simultaneously to some degree. However, the development of a high level of endurance seems to prohibit the development or maintenance of muscle mass and strength. This interaction between endurance and strength is called the concurrent training effect. This review specifically defines the concurrent training effect, discusses the potential molecular mechanisms underlying this effect, and proposes strategies to maximize strength and endurance in the high-level athlete.
    Sports Medicine 11/2014; 44 Suppl 2:117-25. · 5.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Medicine &amp Science in Sports &amp Exercise 01/2011; 43(Suppl 1):309. · 4.46 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
95 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014