Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Circulation Research
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Circulation Research. 2007;101:856-858
doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.107.164053
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Herring, B. P.
Right arrow Articles by Zhou, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Herring, B. P.
Right arrow Articles by Zhou, J.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article
(Circulation Research. 2007;101:856.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.


Editorials

mCAT Got YouR TEF?

B. Paul Herring, Jiliang Zhou

From the Department of Cellular and Integrative Physiology, Indiana University School of Medicine.

Correspondence to Prof Brian P. Herring, Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Cellular and Integrative Physiology, 635 Barnhill Drive, MS350E, Indianapolis, IN 46202. E-mail pherring@iupui.edu



See related article, pages 883–892


Key Words: smooth muscle {alpha}-actin • TGFß, transcriptional enhancer factor 1 • serum response factor • smooth muscle • myofibroblasts


An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.
 


*    TEF and RTEF-1 Binding to the Smooth Muscle {alpha}-Actin Gene Distinguishes Myofibroblasts and Adult Smooth Muscle Cells
 
Adult smooth muscle cells are highly plastic and can exhibit a range of phenotypes in response to different environmental and developmental cues. Their phenotypes can range from quiescent highly contractile cells with high levels of characteristic contractile protein isoforms, to highly proliferative cells that secrete large amounts of extracellular matrix and express only low levels of smooth muscle-specific isoforms of contractile proteins. These two states are often referred to as differentiated and dedifferentiated or phenotypically modulated states.1 In reality the situation is more complex, with smooth muscle cells likely existing in a continuum of phenotypes between these two extremes. This smooth muscle cell plasticity often makes the unequivocal identification of smooth muscle cells challenging, particularly for the more dedifferentiated smooth muscle cells that are very similar to fibroblasts. The situation is further complicated by the existence of cell types with phenotypes part way between a fibroblast and a fully differentiated adult smooth muscle cell, namely myoepithelial and myofibroblast cells, and pericytes.2–4 A major challenge to developmental biologists is determining how these cells relate to each other, determining whether they are derived from common or distinct precursors, and whether myofibroblasts or pericytes can become smooth muscle cells. One approach to begin to answer these questions is to determine the molecular mechanisms that control the phenotype of each of these cell types. A new study by Gan and colleagues,5 described in this issue of Circulation Research, provides definitive molecular evidence that distinguishes myofibroblasts from adult smooth muscle cells by the distinct . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Related Article:

Smooth Muscle Cells and Myofibroblasts Use Distinct Transcriptional Mechanisms for Smooth Muscle {alpha}-Actin Expression
Qiong Gan, Tadashi Yoshida, Jian Li, and Gary K. Owens
Circ. Res. 2007 101: 883-892. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]