| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Endocrinology, Vol 115, 476-484, Copyright © 1984 by Endocrine Society
ARTICLES |
MM Compton and RJ Witorsch
We previously showed that at pH 7.4, the cytosol and a low speed pellet (3300 X g) of rat ventral prostate degraded rat PRL, whereas a high speed pellet (25,000 X g) was inactive. The current study further explores PRL degradation by ventral prostatic tissue. Enzyme markers indicated that the low speed pellet was mitochondria enriched (cytochrome c oxidase), and the high speed pellet was lysosome enriched (acid phosphatase), although there was considerable cross-contamination between the two fractions. Proteolysis of hormone was examined by incubating 125I-labeled rat iodo-PRL with tissue fractions, followed by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and radioautography to identify products and quantify the extent of PRL degradation. Acidification of the incubation medium (pH 4-5) to optimize lysosomal protease activities inhibited PRL degradation in cytosol and activated the process in both pellets consistent with the distribution of acid phosphatase. Under acidic incubation conditions, both low and high speed sediments produced the same electrophoretic pattern of PRL degradation, indicating the generation of peptide fragments from the hormone with a molecular mass of approximately 16,000-8,000 daltons. Cytosol (pH 7.4) also produced peptide fragments in this weight range, although at much lower rates and in relatively lower proportions. Peptide fragment formation from PRL by the low speed pellet (pH 7.4) was minimal. On a protein basis, PRL degradation by the high speed sediment (pH 4.5) was 3-10 times that by the low speed sediment (pH 7.4). Enzyme inhibitor analysis indicated differences in each of the cell fractions with regard to the types of proteases involved in PRL degradation. When compared with other tissues of the male rat, ventral prostate was the most active in degrading PRL and generating peptide fragments. In addition, kidney, spleen, and lung were among the more active tissues, whereas liver, was deferens, and dorsolateral prostate were relatively less active in degrading hormone. Our studies indicate that qualitatively different processes degraded PRL in each of the active subcellular fractions and that the generation of peptide fragments from PRL predominates in a lysosome-rich fraction of ventral prostate. The possible significance of subcellular variations in PRL processing and the generation of peptide fragments of the hormone by peripheral tissue are discussed.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Erdmann, A. Ricken, C. Merkwitz, I. Struman, R. Castino, K. Hummitzsch, F. Gaunitz, C. Isidoro, J. Martial, and K. Spanel-Borowski The expression of prolactin and its cathepsin D-mediated cleavage in the bovine corpus luteum vary with the estrous cycle Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, November 1, 2007; 293(5): E1365 - E1377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Piwnica, I. Fernandez, N. Binart, P. Touraine, P. A. Kelly, and V. Goffin A New Mechanism for Prolactin Processing into 16K PRL by Secreted Cathepsin D Mol. Endocrinol., December 1, 2006; 20(12): 3263 - 3278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Piwnica, P. Touraine, I. Struman, S. Tabruyn, G. Bolbach, C. Clapp, J. A. Martial, P. A. Kelly, and V. Goffin Cathepsin D Processes Human Prolactin into Multiple 16K-Like N-Terminal Fragments: Study of Their Antiangiogenic Properties and Physiological Relevance Mol. Endocrinol., October 1, 2004; 18(10): 2522 - 2542. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Kim, W. Luo, D.-T. Chen, K. Earley, J. Tunstead, L.-Y. Yu-Lee, and S.-H. Lin Antitumor Activity of the 16-kDa Prolactin Fragment in Prostate Cancer Cancer Res., January 15, 2003; 63(2): 386 - 393. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Iguchi, S. Usui, T. Inoue, Y. Sugimura, M. Tatematsu, and K. Hirano High-Level Expression of Zinc Transporter-2 in the Rat Lateral and Dorsal Prostate J Androl, November 1, 2002; 23(6): 819 - 824. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Endocrinology | Endocrine Reviews | J. Clin. End. & Metab. |
| Molecular Endocrinology | Recent Prog. Horm. Res. | All Endocrine Journals |