Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mesnil, M.
Right arrow Articles by Yamasaki, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mesnil, M.
Right arrow Articles by Yamasaki, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1988 Oxford University Press

other

Selective gap-junctional communication capacity of transformed and non-transformed rat liver epithelial cell lines

Marc Mesnil and Hiroshi Yamasaki 1

International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas 69372 Lyon cedex 08, France

1To whom reprint requests should be sent

To investigate whether a selective intercellular communication exists between transformed epithelial cells and their counterparts, the homologous and heterologous communication capacities of four rat liver epithelial cell lines were compared with their expression of transformed phenotypes. All four cell lines showed reasonably good homologous junctional communication capacity, as measured by the dye-transfer assay. In heterologous co-cultures, the non-transformed cell line IAR 20 did not communicate with the transformed cell lines IAR 6–1 or IAR 27 F. These two cell lines showed a high degree of transformed phenotypes such as cell morphology, growth in soft agar and expression of {gamma}-glutamyltrans-peptidase activity. Another cell line IAR 27 E, showed the least degree of transformation and it communicated with IAR 20 cells. Thus, it appears that there is an inverse correlation between the extent of expression of transformed phenotypes by rat liver epithelial cells and their ability to communicate with non-transformed counterparts. There was no heterologous intercellular communication between any combination of IAR 27 E, IAR 27 F and IAR 6–1 cell lines.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
M. Nishimura, T. Saito, H. Yamasaki, and R. Kudo
Suppression of gap junctional intercellular communication via 5' CpG island methylation in promoter region of E-cadherin gene in endometrial cancer cells
Carcinogenesis, October 1, 2003; 24(10): 1615 - 1623.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
T. Husoy, V. Cruciani, T. Sanner, and S.-O. Mikalsen
Phosphorylation of connexin43 and inhibition of gap junctional communication in 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate-exposed R6 fibroblasts: minor role of protein kinase C{beta}I and {micro}
Carcinogenesis, February 1, 2001; 22(2): 221 - 231.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 DevelopmentHome page
F Serras, S Fraser, and C. Chuong
Asymmetric patterns of gap junctional communication in developing chicken skin
Development, January 9, 1993; 119(1): 85 - 96.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Toxicol PatholHome page
C. D. Albright, R. T. Jones, P. M. Grimley, and J. H. Resau
Intercellular Communication in Bronchial Epithelial Cells: Review of Evidence for a Possible Role in Lung Carcinogenesis
Toxicol Pathol, February 1, 1990; 18(2): 324 - 343.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.