Journal of Biological Chemistry
Volume 275, Issue 39, 29 September 2000, Pages 30326-30334
Journal home page for Journal of Biological Chemistry

MEMBRANE TRANSPORT STRUCTURE FUNCTION AND BIOGENESIS
Functional Comparison of the K+-ClCotransporters KCC1 and KCC4*

https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M003112200Get rights and content
Under a Creative Commons license
open access

The K+-Clcotransporters (KCCs) are members of the cation-chloride cotransporter gene family and fall into two phylogenetic subgroups: KCC2 paired with KCC4 and KCC1 paired with KCC3. We report a functional comparison in Xenopus oocytes of KCC1 and KCC4, widely expressed representatives of these two subgroups. KCC1 and KCC4 exhibit differential sensitivity to transport inhibitors, such that KCC4 is much less sensitive to bumetanide and furosemide. The efficacy of these anion inhibitors is critically dependent on the concentration of extracellular K+, with much higher inhibition in 50 mm K+ versus 2 mmK+. KCC4 is also uniquely sensitive to 10 mmbarium and to 2 mm trichlormethiazide. Kinetic characterization reveals divergent affinities for K+(Km values of ∼25.5 and 17.5 mm for KCC1 and KCC4, respectively), probably due to variation within the second transmembrane segment. Although the two isoforms have equivalent affinities for Cl, they differ in the anion selectivity of K+ transport (Cl > SCN = Br > PO4−3 > Ifor KCC1 and Cl > Br > PO4−3 = I > SCNfor KCC4). Both KCCs express minimal K+-Clcotransport under isotonic conditions, with significant activation by cell swelling under hypotonic conditions. The cysteine-alkylating agent N-ethylmaleimide activates K+-Cl cotransport in isotonic conditions but abrogates hypotonic activation, an unexpected dissociation of N-ethylmaleimide sensitivity and volume sensitivity. Although KCC4 is consistently more volume-sensitive, the hypotonic activation of both isoforms is critically dependent on protein phosphatase 1. Overall, the functional comparison of these cloned K+-Cl cotransporters reveals important functional, pharmacological, and kinetic differences with both physiological and mechanistic implications.

Cited by (0)

Published, JBC Papers in Press, July 25, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M003112200

*

This work was supported by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia Grant 97629m and Howard Hughes Medical Institute Grant 75197-553601 (to G. G.) and National Institutes of Health Grants K11 DK02328 and RO1 DK57708 (to D. B. M.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

§

Supported by a scholarship grant from the Dirección General del Personal Académico of the National University of Mexico.