1975
DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9258(19)41002-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Liver cytosol corticosteroid binder IB, a new binding protein.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1977
1977
1983
1983

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After activation by heat (30 min at 25 °C), liver cytosol radioactivity was largely associated with the less acidic fraction eluted with 0.2-0.25 M KC1, corticosteroid binder II (Litwack et al, 1973). The radioactivity bound to the protein fraction in the buffer wash is identified as the previously characterized (Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975) corticosteroid binder IB (Figure 1C). Following heat activation, almost all radioactivity from kidney cytosol was bound to the protein which is eluted in the position of IB (Figure 1G).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…After activation by heat (30 min at 25 °C), liver cytosol radioactivity was largely associated with the less acidic fraction eluted with 0.2-0.25 M KC1, corticosteroid binder II (Litwack et al, 1973). The radioactivity bound to the protein fraction in the buffer wash is identified as the previously characterized (Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975) corticosteroid binder IB (Figure 1C). Following heat activation, almost all radioactivity from kidney cytosol was bound to the protein which is eluted in the position of IB (Figure 1G).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…The results here indicate the existence of a distinctive and identical glucocorticoid receptor type in all the tissues studied except for kidney cortex, whose 0006-2960/80/0419-4556S01.00/0 © 1980 American Chemical Society 19, NO. 20, 1 980 4557 major receptor is similar to a second form in liver cytosol, corticosteroid binder IB (Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect of molybdate on the formation of activated glucocorticoid-receptor complexes from liver cytosol is shown in Figure 2. Using chromatography on DEAE-Sephadex our laboratory has identified two proteins in rat liver cytosol which preferentially bind synthetic glucocorticoids (Litwack et al, 1973; Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975). Liver binder II, which binds to DEAE-Sephadex, fulfills the criteria of the glucocorticoid receptor (Litwack et al, 1973), while liver binder IB, which does not bind to DEAE-Sephadex, represents a binding protein of unknown physiological function (Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using chromatography on DEAE-Sephadex our laboratory has identified two proteins in rat liver cytosol which preferentially bind synthetic glucocorticoids (Litwack et al, 1973; Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975). Liver binder II, which binds to DEAE-Sephadex, fulfills the criteria of the glucocorticoid receptor (Litwack et al, 1973), while liver binder IB, which does not bind to DEAE-Sephadex, represents a binding protein of unknown physiological function (Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975). More recent work from this laboratory (Litwack et al, 1980) had established that the major glucocorticoid binding protein in rat kidney medulla resembles liver binder II (the glucocorticoid receptor).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…observed, it appeared to be due to limited receptor proteolysis (Wrange & Gustafsson, 1978;Carlstedt-Duke et al, 1979;Govindan, 1980;Govindan & Manz, 1980;Stevens & Stevens, 1981;Tsawdaroglou et al, 1981). However, in at least one instance (Litwack & Rosenfield, 1975;Markovic et al, 1980), a second species of glucocorticoid receptor, designated binder IB, which did not appear to be a proteolytic fragment of the major receptor form (binder II; Litwack et al, 1973), was found to occur in a tissue-specific fashion. In the present study, the activated receptor eluted as a single, symmetrical peak on all the columns tested, regardless of the activation method used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%