Garlick P J, McNurlan M A, Essén P, Wernerman J
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Am J Physiol. 1994 Mar;266(3 Pt 1):E287-97. doi: 10.1152/ajpendo.1994.266.3.E287.
The extension of the flooding method for measuring the rate of protein synthesis, from animal to human tissues, has led to criticism. This is based on the observation that in human muscle, unlike animal tissues, the rate of synthesis in the fasting state measured with constant infusion is lower than that obtained with the flooding technique. Moreover, incorporation of infused tracer can be enhanced with a simultaneous flood, although an inhibition of incorporation has also been reported. Explanations for these observed discrepancies are explored. Evidence from studies in human muscle both with flooding and with a nonisotopic technique have given no indication of a stimulation of protein synthesis during flooding. It is therefore concluded that the most likely explanation for the discrepancy between methods is that changes in the isotopic enrichment of the precursor amino acid, which are minimized by the flooding procedure, are not adequately accounted for with the constant infusion method.
将用于测量蛋白质合成速率的灌注法从动物组织扩展到人体组织引发了批评。这是基于以下观察结果:在人体肌肉中,与动物组织不同,在禁食状态下通过持续输注测量的合成速率低于通过灌注技术获得的速率。此外,尽管也有报道称灌注示踪剂的掺入受到抑制,但同时进行灌注可增强其掺入。本文探讨了对这些观察到的差异的解释。来自人体肌肉中灌注法和非同位素技术研究的证据均未表明灌注过程中蛋白质合成受到刺激。因此得出结论,方法之间差异最可能的解释是,灌注程序将前体氨基酸同位素丰度的变化最小化,但恒定输注法并未充分考虑这些变化。