trans‐4‐Amino‐2‐methylbut‐2‐enoic acid (2‐MeTACA) and (±)‐trans‐2‐aminomethylcyclopropanecarboxylic acid ((±)‐TAMP) can differentiate rat ρ3 from human ρ1 and ρ2 recombinant GABAC receptors

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
1. This study investigated the effects of a number of GABA analogues on rat rho3 GABA(C) receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes using 2-electrode voltage clamp methods. 2. The potency order of agonists was muscimol (EC(50)=1.9 +/- 0.1 microM) (+)-trans-3-aminocyclopentanecarboxylic acids ((+)-TACP; EC(50)=2.7 +/- 0.9 microM) trans-4-aminocrotonic acid (TACA; EC(50)=3.8 +/-0.3 microM) GABA (EC(50)=4.0 +/- 0.3 microM) > thiomuscimol (EC(50)=24.8 +/- 2.6 microM) > (+/-)-cis-2-aminomethylcyclopropane-carboxylic acid ((+/-)-CAMP; EC(50)=52.6 +/-8.7 microM) > cis-4-aminocrotonic acid (CACA; EC(50)=139.4 +/- 5.2 microM). 3. The potency order of antagonists was (+/-)-trans-2-aminomethylcyclopropanecarboxylic acid ((+/-)-TAMP; K(B)=4.8+/-1.8 microM) (1,2,5,6-tetrahydropyridin-4-yl)methylphosphinic acid (TPMPA; K(B)=4.8 +/-0.8 microM) > (piperidin-4-yl)methylphosphinic acid (P4MPA; K(B)=10.2+/-2.3 microM) 4,5,6,7-tetrahydroisoxazolo[5,4-c]pyridin-3-ol (THIP; K(B)=10.2+/-0.3 microM) imidazole-4-acetic acid (I4AA; K(B)=12.6+/-2.7 microM) > 3-aminopropylphosphonic acid (3-APA; K(B)=35.8+/-13.5 microM). 4. trans-4-Amino-2-methylbut-2-enoic acid (2-MeTACA; 300 microM) had no effect as an agonist or an antagonist indicating that the C2 methyl substituent is sterically interacting with the ligand-binding site of rat rho3 GABA(C) receptors. 5. 2-MeTACA affects rho1 and rho2 but not rho3 GABA(C) receptors. In contrast, (plus minus)-TAMP is a partial agonist at rho1 and rho2 GABA(C) receptors, while at rat rho3 GABA(C) receptors it is an antagonist. Thus, 2-MeTACA and (+/-)-TAMP could be important pharmacological tools because they may functionally differentiate between rho1, rho2 and rho3 GABA(C) receptors in vitro.