Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Apr 1;16(4):e0234591. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234591

Hemodynamic and electromechanical effects of paraquat in rat heart

Chih-Chuan Lin 1, Kuang-Hung Hsu 2, Chia-Pang Shih 3, Gwo-Jyh Chang 4,5,*
Editor: Richard T Clements6
PMCID: PMC8016255  PMID: 33793552

Abstract

Paraquat (PQ) is a highly lethal herbicide. Ingestion of large quantities of PQ usually results in cardiovascular collapse and eventual mortality. Recent pieces of evidence indicate possible involvement of oxidative stress- and inflammation-related factors in PQ-induced cardiac toxicity. However, little information exists on the relationship between hemodynamic and cardiac electromechanical effects involved in acute PQ poisoning. The present study investigated the effects of acute PQ exposure on hemodynamics and electrocardiogram (ECG) in vivo, left ventricular (LV) pressure in isolated hearts, as well as contractile and intracellular Ca2+ properties and ionic currents in ventricular myocytes in a rat model. In anesthetized rats, intravenous PQ administration (100 or 180 mg/kg) induced dose-dependent decreases in heart rate, blood pressure, and cardiac contractility (LV +dP/dtmax). Furthermore, PQ administration prolonged the PR, QRS, QT, and rate-corrected QT (QTc) intervals. In Langendorff-perfused isolated hearts, PQ (33 or 60 μM) decreased LV pressure and contractility (LV +dP/dtmax). PQ (10–60 μM) reduced the amplitudes of Ca2+ transients and fractional cell shortening in a concentration-dependent manner in isolated ventricular myocytes. Moreover, whole-cell patch-clamp experiments demonstrated that PQ decreased the current amplitude and availability of the transient outward K+ channel (Ito) and altered its gating kinetics. These results suggest that PQ-induced cardiotoxicity results mainly from diminished Ca2+ transients and inhibited K+ channels in cardiomyocytes, which lead to LV contractile force suppression and QTc interval prolongation. These findings should provide novel cues to understand PQ-induced cardiac suppression and electrical disturbances and may aid in the development of new treatment modalities.

Introduction

Paraquat (PQ) is a highly toxic herbicide that causes significant mortality when ingested. It is a widely used herbicide because of its excellent ability to eliminate weeds [1]. However, intentionally ingesting PQ to commit suicide is a common problem in some Asian countries (e.g., Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Sri Lanka) [25]. No specific and effective therapy for clinical PQ poisoning currently exists. Nevertheless, early detection and immediate treatment commencement for specific organ injuries are crucial for the prognosis of PQ intoxication prognosis.

Fulminant PQ poisoning patients with cardiovascular collapse and multiple organ failure have the highest mortality rate of over 50% [6,7]. Expiry mostly occurs within 24–72 h or one week [6,7]. The heart is one of the major severely injured organs in PQ poisoning. Histologically, acute PQ poisoning may cause PQ accumulation and direct myocardial injury and dysfunction [810]. Our previous study indicated that acute PQ poisoning also causes rate-corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation which may serve as a useful prognostic factor for poor clinical outcome [11]. As known, QTc interval prolongation may predispose subjects to ventricular arrhythmias [12]. Moreover, QTc prolongation is thought to be related to left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction in cardiac disease patients [13]. In human PQ poisoning cases, minimal changes on the electrocardiogram (ECG) to extensive myocardial necrosis had been observed [10,14]. Moreover, severe PQ cardiotoxicity may lead to sudden death induced by either cardiac arrhythmias or acute heart failure [10,14]. Several studies have recently demonstrated that inflammation and oxidative stress evoked through pathways involving the activation of Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) and endothelin receptor A (ETA) or downregulation of Forkhead box O3 (FoxO3) [1517] may contribute to PQ-induced cardiac toxicity. It is widely accepted that PQ catalyzes the formation of ROS which may cause lipid peroxidation leading to cardiac dysfunction [18]. However, the hemodynamic and cardiac electromechanical effects following acute PQ intoxication have not been elucidated. Moreover, the precise cellular mechanism underlying the PQ exposure-induced QTc prolongation remains unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the underlying mechanisms of PQ-induced cardiotoxicity both in vivo and in vitro. Thus, its impact on hemodynamic and ECG parameters of anesthetized rats; its effects on LV pressure of isolated hearts; as well as its effects on Ca2+ transients, cell shortening, and K+ currents of ventricular myocytes have been defined.

Materials and methods

Experimental animals

All experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Chang Gung University (IACUC approval numbers CGU07-16 and CGU09-015) and performed in accordance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals published by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH publication No. 85–23, revised 1996). Adult male Sprague–Dawley rats, which were healthy and weighed 250–300 g, were purchased from BioLASCO Tech. Co. (Taipei, Taiwan). Animals were housed in polypropylene cages and kept under standard laboratory conditions (12/12 h light/darkness, 45–60% relative humidity, and 24–26°C room temperature) for at least one week before starting the experiments. Food and water were available ad libitum. Animal experiments were performed at the same time of the day. Furthermore, 101 animals were included in the study with 30 and 28 animals used for in vivo and isolated heart studies, respectively, and 43 for single cardiomyocyte study. All efforts were made to minimize animal suffering.

Materials

PQ dichloride (Mw 257.16 g/mol) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Cat. No. 856177; St. Louis, MO, USA) and prepared in physiological saline. Fura-2-acetoxymethyl ester (Fura-2-AM) and Pluronic F-127 were purchased from Molecular Probes (Eugene, OR, USA) and dissolved in dimethylsulfoxide. All other drugs were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and prepared in physiological saline before the start of each experiment. In clinical situations, PQ poisoning is classified as mild, moderate to severe, and massive [7]. In humans, ingestion of dosages >40 mg/kg BW may cause acute fulminant poisoning with an extremely high mortality rate [7]. The reported LD50 value in rats was around 57 mg/kg. In general, the lethal dose in rodents is much higher compared with humans. Therefore, 100 and 180 mg/kg (approximately twice and triple LD50, respectively) were used for in vivo study to simulate the clinical severity of PQ poisoning. For in vitro study, the concentrations used were estimated according to the calculated blood concentrations of PQ, assuming that blood volume (in mL) represents 7% of the body weight (in g). Consequently, dosages of 100 and 180 mg/kg PQ should produce approximate blood concentrations of 5.56 and 10 mM, respectively. However, a much lower concentration (e.g., 1–60 μM) was chosen than the estimated ones for the current in vitro study. The action of the drug is confined in the heart and the drug can also easily access its target sites in the in vitro conditions.

Hemodynamic and ECG measurements in anesthetized rats

Adult male Sprague-Dawley rats weighing 250–300 g were anesthetized with urethane (1.25 g/kg, i.p.). To measure arterial pressure, a polyethylene (PE50) cannula filled with heparinized saline (25 IU/mL) was inserted into the femoral artery as previously described [19]. The femoral vein was cannulated with a PE50 catheter for drug or vehicle administration. The arterial cannula was connected to an MLT0380/D pressure transducer (ADInstruments, Bella Vista, Australia) linked to a QuadBridge amplifier (ADInstruments). ECG needles were connected to a biological amplifier (ADInstruments), and lead II ECGs were simultaneously recorded. QT intervals were rate corrected according to normalized Bazett’s formula QTc = QT/(RR/f)1/2, where f is the normalized factor according to the basal RR duration [20]. In our study, the average RR duration at basal conditions was 182 ms. Consequently, the value of 180 ms was chosen as the f value. A 1.9-F microtip pressure–volume catheter (Model FTS-1912B, Scisense Inc., London, Canada) was advanced from the right carotid artery into the LV chamber under pressure control for measuring LV pressure (LVP). LVP signals were continuously recorded using a pressure–volume conductance system (Model 891A, Scisense). Output signals from these amplifiers were connected to a Ponemah ACQ16 acquisition system (DSI Ponemah, Valley View, OH, USA), recorded at a sampling rate of 4 kHz, and stored and displayed on a computer. All arterial and LV pressure data were analyzed using a data analysis program (P3 Plus4.80-SP4, DSI Ponemah). Consequently, the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), LV end-systolic pressure (LVESP), LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP), and maximal rate of rising (+dP/dtmax) and fall (–dP/dtmax) of LVP were computed. After 20 min of stabilization, saline or PQ (100 or 180 mg/kg) solution was intravenously administered in the control or drug-treated groups, respectively. The infusion volume was 1 mL/kg and given for 1 min. Following the infusion test, animals were injected with urethane (1.25 g/kg, i.v.) to induce deep anesthesia and then sacrificed by cervical dislocation.

Intraventricular pressure measurement in Langendorff-perfused rat hearts

The rats were anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium (50 mg/kg, i.p.) and placed on an operating table. Rat hearts were immediately excised, mounted on a Langendorff apparatus, and perfused at a constant pressure of approximately 55 mmHg with oxygenated (95% O2 and 5% CO2) normal Tyrode’s solution containing (in mM): NaCl 137.0, KCl 5.4, MgCl2 1.1, NaHCO3 11.9, NaH2PO4 0.33, CaCl2 1.8, and dextrose 11.0 at 37°C as previously described [21]. A latex balloon (size No. 5, Radnoti, Monrovia, CA, USA) connected by a short stainless steel tube to a pressure transducer (P23XL-1, Becton, Dickinson & Co., Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) was inserted into the LV cavity via the left atrium. The balloon was inflated with 0.04 mL distilled water, sufficient to produce an end-diastolic pressure of 8–12 mmHg. The ventricles were paced electrically at 300 beats per minute by platinum contact electrodes positioned on the right ventricular apex. Data were recorded on a WindowGraf recorder (Gould Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA) and digitized with a computer-based data acquisition system (PowerLab/4SP with Chart 5 software, ADInstruments). Each preparation was allowed to equilibrate for 2–2.5 h before drug testing. LV developed pressure (LVDP) was calculated by subtracting LVEDP from the LV peak systolic pressure. LVP signal differentiation was used to determine LV +dP/dtmax and–dP/dtmax.

Single cardiac myocyte isolation

Single ventricular myocytes from adult rats were obtained by an enzymatic dissociation method previously described [19,21]. In brief, the excised heart was mounted on a Langendorff apparatus and retrogradely perfused at a rate of 6 mL/min/g cardiac tissue by a peristaltic pump with nominally Ca2+-free 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid (HEPES)-buffered Tyrode’s solution containing (in mM): NaCl 137.0, KCl 5.4, KH2PO4 1.2, MgSO4 1.22, dextrose 22.0, and HEPES 6.0, titrated to pH 7.4 with NaOH. The perfusate was oxygenated and maintained at 37 ± 0.2°C by a heating circulator. After 5 min, the perfusate was changed to the same solution containing 0.3 mg/mL collagenase (Type II, Sigma-Aldrich) and 0.1 mg/mL protease (Type XIV, Sigma-Aldrich). After digestion for 7–15 min, the residual enzyme solution was removed by perfusing 0.05 mM Ca2+-containing Tyrode’s solution. The ventricles were then separated from the atria, dispersed, and stored in 0.2 mM Ca2+-containing Tyrode’s solution for later use. Rod-shaped Ca2+-tolerant viable cells with clear striations were used for experiments.

Measurements of intracellular Ca2+ transients and cell shortening

Ventricular myocytes were loaded with the fluorescent Ca2+-sensitive indicator, fura-2, by incubating cells in 0.5 mM Ca2+-containing HEPES-buffered solution containing 5 μM fura-2-AM and 2% Pluronic F-127 for 30 min at room temperature, as previously described [19,21]. After washing out the excess fura-2-AM, cells were stored in 0.5 mM Ca2+-containing HEPES-buffered solution. Fura-2–loaded myocytes were transferred to 1.8 mM Ca2+-containing HEPES buffer for at least 30 min before beginning the experiments. Myocytes were placed on an inverted microscope (Axio Observer Z1, Carl Zeiss MicroImaging GmbH, Jena, Germany) equipped with a heated (37°C) chamber. Myocytes were then electrically stimulated using a pair of platinum electrodes with a 2-ms and twofold threshold rectangular voltage pulse at 1 Hz. The cells were illuminated with ultraviolet light from a light source (DeltaScan, PTI-HORIBA Scientific, Edison, NJ, USA). The excitation lights with a 340 or 380 nm wavelength passed through a ×40 oil immersion objective to the cell by a dichroic mirror. The emission light passed through a filter (510 nm) and was detected by a photomultiplier tube and recorded using a RatioMaster fluorometer (PTI-HORIBA Scientific). Furthermore, excitation light was intermittently applied and attenuated by 90% using a neutral density filter to minimize photobleaching of fura-2. Signals were acquired using a data acquisition system controlled with professional software (FeliX32TM, PTI-HORIBA Scientific). Moreover, intracellular Ca2+ was directly expressed as the ratio of the light emitted at excitation wavelengths of 340 and 380 nm (F340/F380) because the fura-2 ratio is not a linear function of intracellular Ca2+ concentration when cells are loaded with fura-2-AM. Background fluorescence measured from a cell-free field was subtracted from all recordings before ratio calculation. Cell shortening was measured optically with an R12 dual raster line edge detector system (Crescent Electronics, Sandy, UT, USA). Images of contracting myocytes were viewed with a charge-coupled device camera mounted with a dual C port adaptor on the side port of the microscope. The camera signals were linked to the edge detector electronics. All signals were collected at a sampling rate of 200 points/s. The incubation time for each concentration of PQ was around 4.5 min.

Whole-cell patch-clamp recording

A small aliquot of dissociated cells was placed in a 1-mL chamber mounted on the stage of an inverted microscope (Axio Observer Z1, Carl Zeiss). Cells were bathed at room temperature (25–27°C) in HEPES-buffered Tyrode’s solution. Ionic currents were recorded in the whole-cell configuration as previously described [21]. Patch electrodes were made from glass capillaries (o.d.: 1.5 mm, i.d.: 1.0 mm; A-M Systems, Sequim, WA, USA) using a two-stage vertical puller (P-830, Narishige, Tokyo, Japan) and were fire-polished. The electrode resistances were 2–5 MΩ when filled with normal pipette solution (containing in mM: KCl 120.0, NaCl 10.0, MgATP 5.0, EGTA 5.0, and HEPES 10.0, adjusted to pH 7.2 with KOH). Membrane currents were recorded using a voltage-clamp amplifier (Axopatch 200B, Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Electrode junction potentials (5–10 mV) were measured and nulled before cell suction. A high-resistance seal (5–10 GΩ) was obtained before membrane patch disruption. Usually, >5 min was allowed for adequate cell dialysis following membrane patch disruption and before initiating the voltage pulse protocol. Series resistances were compensated to minimize the duration of capacitive surge on the current recording and the voltage drop produced across the clamped cell membrane. About 60%–80% of series resistances were compensated. Cell capacitance was measured by calculating the capacitive transient’s total charge movement in response to a 5-mV hyperpolarizing pulse. Command pulses were generated by a 12-bit digital-to-analog converter (Digidata 1320A, Molecular Devices) controlled by pCLAMP software (Molecular Devices, version 8).

During K+ current measurements, Ca2+ and Na+ inward currents were blocked by adding 1 mM Co2+ and 30 μM tetrodotoxin (TTX) to the bathing solution, respectively. To activate K+ currents, cells were voltage-clamped at a holding potential of –80 mV, and currents (inward rectifier [IK1] or transient outward [Ito] K+ current) were elicited by 500-ms hyperpolarizing or depolarizing test pulses ranging from –140 to +60 mV. Steady-state inactivation of Ito was examined with a double-pulse protocol: a conditioning 400-ms pulse to various potentials ranging from –80 to 0 mV was followed by a test depolarizing pulse to +60 mV. The holding potential was –80 mV. Each peak current was normalized to the maximum current measured and plotted as a function of the conditioning potential. The resultant curves were fitted by the Boltzmann equation to estimate half-inactivation potential (Vh) and slope factor (k). The twin-pulse protocol, which consisted of two identical 200-ms depolarizing pulses to +60 mV from a holding potential of –80 mV, was used to study the recovery of Ito channels. Prepulse–test pulse intervals varied between 10 and 550 ms. The incubation time for each PQ concentration was around 4.5 min.

Statistical methods and data analysis

Continuous data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) unless otherwise indicated. Categorical data are expressed as frequency (in percentage). Statistical comparisons were made using SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA), and p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. The Student’s t-test was used for univariate analysis of continuous variables. Generalized estimation equation (GEE) models were conducted to analyze the change of outcome variables over time and were employed in the analysis of variables in Table 1 and Fig 3. The body weight of rats was also adjusted in fitting GEE models. The outcome variable distribution was proved to be Gaussian by a normality test. An exchangeable working correlation matrix was applied when applying the GEE method. An equation of the form fitted concentration-response curves: E = Emax/[1+(IC50)nH], where E is the effect at concentration C, Emax is the maximal effect, IC50 is the concentration for half-maximal inhibition and nH is the Hill coefficient. The conductance of Ito (Gto) was calculated according to the equation Gto = Ito/(VmVrev), where Vrev is the reversal potential of Ito. The activation curves of Ito were fitted by the Boltzmann equation: Gto/Gto, max = 1/{1+exp[(VhVm)/k]}, where Gto, max is the maximal ionic conductance, Vh is the half-maximal activation potential, Vm is the membrane potential, and k is the slope factor. The inactivation curves of Ito were fitted by the Boltzmann equation: Ito/Ito, max = 1/{1+exp[(Vm-Vh)/k]}; where Ito gives the current amplitude and Ito, max is its maximum, Vm is the prepulse potential, Vh is the half-maximal inactivation potential, and k is the slope factor.

Table 1. Effects of PQ on hemodynamic and electrocardiographic variables in anesthetized rats.

Time (min)
Variables 0–20 30–50 60–80 90–110 120–140 150–170 180–200 210–230 p value
HR (beats/min)
Saline 344 ± 45 332 ± 50 336 ± 45 336 ± 45 340 ± 47 342 ± 41 339 ± 43 343 ± 42
100 mg/kg PQ 314 ± 36 303 ± 33 302 ± 37 302 ± 44 300 ± 50 286 ± 50 272 ± 44 276 ± 43 <0.0001
180 mg/kg PQ 344 ± 38 359 ± 50 366 ± 48 350 ± 62 348 ± 40 331 ± 31 287 ± 33 302 ± 9 0.001
SBP (mmHg)
Saline 102.0 ± 20.5 92.8 ± 22.6 95.4 ± 24.9 91.5 ± 21.2 88.9 ± 25.2 84.0 ± 27.0 78.3 ± 33.1 80.6 ± 34.0
100 mg/kg PQ 98.0 ± 22.7 95.2 ± 20.0 82.6 ± 30.5 73.6 ± 35.5 74.2 ± 33.4 61.9 ± 32.9 56.0 ± 37.7 60.1 ± 39.4 0.02
180 mg/kg PQ 92.6 ± 25.6 97.8 ± 30.2 97.8 ± 31.3 82.7 ± 28.8 79.6 ± 25.6 68.1 ± 29.8 51.1 ± 13.9 47.5 ± 18.0 0.0001
DBP (mmHg)
Saline 46.8 ± 10.5 41.1 ± 12.1 41.7 ± 13.8 38.7 ± 11.9 37.5 ± 14.5 36.4 ± 14.9 35.0 ± 17.2 36.2 ± 16.9
100 mg/kg PQ 40.5 ± 10.9 34.8 ± 10.5 29.4 ± 12.9 26.4 ± 15.1 24.8 ± 13.6 21.0 ± 12.9 18.7 ± 14.6 20.7 ± 17.8 0.03
180 mg/kg PQ 40.0 ± 10.8 40.3 ± 10.7 36.7 ± 10.7 29.1 ± 10.5 26.9 ± 9.7 21.9 ± 12.2 16.6 ± 3.9 14.7 ± 4.6 0.0001
MAP (mmHg)
Saline 65.8 ± 12.2 59.4 ± 14.7 58.6 ± 15.8 56.6 ± 15.0 54.6 ± 16.9 52.9 ± 17.8 49.4 ± 20.8 50.5 ± 21.9
100 mg/kg PQ 60.2 ± 14.1 54.2 ± 12.5 45.7 ± 17.0 41.0 ± 19.6 40.8 ± 19.2 36.1 ± 20.3 31.4 ± 21.8 34.1 ± 24.5 0.03
180 mg/kg PQ 61.3 ± 15.5 58.8 ± 14.7 55.5 ± 16.1 50.0 ± 16.8 47.2 ± 14.8 38.6 ± 15.0 27.8 ± 6.4 27.6 ± 7.9 0.0002
LVESP (mmHg)
Saline 105.1 ± 12.8 98.9 ± 14.5 98.4 ± 14.1 95.7 ± 14.3 92.6 ± 17.0 90.2 ± 18.3 85.6 ± 23.0 86.6 ± 23.3
100 mg/kg PQ 96.6 ± 13.4 93.1 ± 12.8 84.8 ± 19.7 81.1 ± 24.0 81.2 ± 22.1 74.6 ± 25.4 67.7 ± 29.9 75.4 ± 24.5 0.11
180 mg/kg PQ 103.9 ± 24.1 102.7 ± 26.5 101.8 ± 22.6 94.7 ± 26.8 95.1 ± 19.5 90.2 ± 17.5 77.8 ± 21.4 87.1 ± 30.3 0.0003
LVEDP (mmHg)
Saline 4.6 ± 2.9 4.4 ± 2.9 4.4 ± 2.9 4.3 ± 3.1 4.0 ± 3.1 4.0 ± 3.2 3.7 ± 3.2 3.8 ± 3.5
100 mg/kg PQ 1.4 ± 3.2 1.4 ± 3.1 1.7 ± 3.5 2.5 ± 3.4 3.4 ± 3.1 3.9 ± 3.2 3.8 ± 3.4 4.6 ± 4.2 0.01
180 mg/kg PQ 0.4 ± 4.5 0.6 ± 4.4 1.6 ± 4.5 1.6 ± 4.3 1.6 ± 4.1 1.2 ± 3.0 0.6 ± 3.1 3.0 ± 2.0 0.75
+dP/dtmax (mmHg/s)
Saline 9406 ± 2171 8297 ± 2226 8336 ± 2225 8013 ± 2001 7695 ± 2351 7347 ± 2214 7039 ± 2848 7303 ± 2756
100 mg/kg PQ 8853 ± 1311 8292 ± 1350 7341 ± 2267 6706 ± 3282 6779 ± 3059 5922 ± 2825 4684 ± 2819 4672 ± 2152 0.004
180 mg/kg PQ 7602 ± 2931 7987 ± 3374 8482 ± 3522 7901 ± 3846 8041 ± 3725 7063 ± 3614 4909 ± 2721 6009 ± 2883 0.07
–dP/dtmax (mmHg/s)
Saline -4745 ± 1081 -4240 ± 981 -4245 ± 1116 -3993 ± 931 -3851 ± 1045 -3706 ± 1081 -3501 ± 1261 -3547 ± 1129
100 mg/kg PQ -4225 ± 1092 -3867 ± 13134 -3334 ± 1782 -3350 ± 1889 -3318 ± 1653 -2677 ± 1577 -2451 ± 1761 -2778 ± 1591 0.05
180 mg/kg PQ -4114 ± 2014 -4509 ± 2434 -4271 ± 2177 -3608 ± 1951 -3829 ± 2009 -3426 ± 1851 -2341 ± 650 -2140 ± 714 0.01
P wave duration (ms)
Saline 28.2 ± 5.8 28.3 ± 5.8 27.8 ± 6.2 28.7 ± 6.3 27.7 ± 6.1 27.9 ± 6.1 28.8 ± 5.9 32.2 ± 9.4
100 mg/kg PQ 24.8 ± 3.4 25.1 ± 3.1 26.2 ± 4.5 27.6 ± 5.4 28.1 ± 6.5 26.8 ± 5.3 30.3 ± 8.6 33.1 ± 8.8 0.006
180 mg/kg PQ 29.7 ± 7.8 30.5 ± 8.9 30.2 ± 8.4 33.2 ± 10.5 32.1 ± 10.8 30.9 ± 7.3 49.2 ± 13.5 47.9 ± 8.2 0.0008
PR (ms)
Saline 60.3 ± 7.9 60.9 ± 7.8 60.5 ± 7.2 60.2 ± 8.3 60.2 ± 7.4 61.2 ± 7.2 61.0 ± 8.8 64.4 ± 11.5
100 mg/kg PQ 66.9 ± 5.8 66.0 ± 4.9 67.0 ± 5.1 68.0 ± 6.7 68.8 ± 8.5 70.2 ± 8.3 78.7 ± 12.3 83.2 ± 13.4 0.02
180 mg/kg PQ 60.9 ± 6.8 66.0 ± 21.4 60.8 ± 11.4 61.3 ± 14.2 62.5 ± 15.9 61.0 ± 11.4 79.2 ± 13.9 39.1 ± 36.2 0.047
QRS (ms)
Saline 14.2 ± 1.0 14.1 ± 1.0 14.2 ± 0.9 13.9 ± 0.8 13.9 ± 0.9 13.8 ± 0.8 13.9 ± 1.0 14.5 ± 1.7
100 mg/kg PQ 14.2 ± 1.3 13.7 ± 1.3 14.2 ± 1.4 15.9 ± 3.8 15.6 ± 3.4 16.4 ± 4.0 20.8 ± 7.8 22.4 ± 6.2 0.0002
180 mg/kg PQ 14.0 ± 1.6 14.5 ± 3.6 14.1 ± 3.1 15.0 ± 5.3 13.3 ± 2.3 16.1 ± 3.0 24.7 ± 10.0 35.8 ± 29.0 < .0001
QT (ms)
Saline 65.1 ± 13.2 65.6 ± 11.3 66.8 ± 10.2 66.3 ± 10.7 66.7 ± 10.8 67.1 ± 9.9 68.1 ± 10.1 70.0 ± 9.9
100 mg/kg PQ 77.1 ± 16.7 86.7 ± 11.5 86.4 ± 11.8 85.5 ± 14.0 92.1 ± 11.1 96.2 ± 14.0 96.5 ± 13.3 93.5 ± 21.0 0.02
180 mg/kg PQ 78.5 ± 6.8 83.5 ± 10.5 84.2 ± 15.0 86.8 ± 14.2 79.6 ± 6.5 83.5 ± 8.6 91.0 ± 11.3 101.4 ± 22.1 < .0001
QTc (ms)
Saline 66.2 ± 15.8 65.5 ± 13.6 67.1 ± 12.9 66.6 ± 12.6 66.5 ± 13.0 67.1 ± 12.0 68.1 ± 12.6 68.7 ± 11.6
100 mg/kg PQ 74.3 ± 15.8 82.5 ± 9.8 82.1 ± 10.1 80.5 ± 14.3 85.8 ± 6.2 88.7 ± 7.1 85.5 ± 9.6 89.9 ± 13.8 0.61
180 mg/kg PQ 79.6 ± 7.4 83.7 ± 10.9 84.8 ± 12.3 84.2 ± 12.3 77.4 ± 8.4 83.1 ± 7.3 84.5 ± 7.4 89.2 ± 10.9 0.04

Data are expressed as mean ± SD of n = 10 rats per group. p value of slope with time effect compared to saline group. HR, heart rate; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; MAP, mean arterial blood pressure; LVESP, left ventricular end systolic pressure; LVEDP, left ventricular end diastolic left ventricle pressure; +dP/dtmax and–dP/dtmax, maximal rate of ringing and fall of LV pressure, respectively; QTc, rate-corrected QT interval derived using normalized Bazett’s formula QTc = QT/(RR/f)1/2, where f = 180 ms.

Fig 3. Effects of PQ on Ca2+ transients (represented by fura-2 fluorescence ratio F340/F380) and cell shortening in rat ventricular myocytes paced at 1 Hz.

Fig 3

(A) Continuous recordings of Ca2+ transients (upper panel) and cell shortening (lower panel) showing the effects of the cumulative application of 10, 30, and 60 μM PQ. (B) Recordings on an expanded time scale taken at the time indicated by the corresponding letters over the F340/F380 trace in A. (C, D) The mean data of the amplitude of cell shortening (C) and Ca2+ transient (D) before and after application of PQ. Data are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 11). Cell shortening was normalized to resting cell length.

Results

Effects of PQ on hemodynamic measurements and ECG

Baseline hemodynamic and ECG parameters did not significantly vary among rats receiving the saline vehicle or PQ at a dose of 100 or 180 mg/kg (S1 Table). Fig 1 shows a representative example of the PQ effect (180 mg/kg) on arterial pressure, LV pressure, first derivative of LV pressure (LV dP/dt), and the ECG at different time points. PQ impeded LV performance in both systolic and diastolic phases, decreased blood pressure, and slowed heart rates. PQ also prolonged P wave duration and the PR, QRS, QT, and QTc intervals in a dose-dependent manner (Table 1). In contrast, the infusion of the corresponding volume of vehicle (normal saline) produced no significant changes in any of the parameters (S1 Fig and Table 1). All the animals treated with saline vehicles survived until the end of the experiment. The calculated mortality rate of 100 and 180 mg/kg PQ-treated rats was 60% (6/10; p < 0.05) and 90% (9/10; p < 0.001), respectively. The higher mortality rate was closely correlated with a longer QTc interval of rats following PQ infusion.

Fig 1. Representative recordings of arterial pressure, LV pressure (LVP), first derivative of LV pressure (LV dP/dt), and ECG from an anesthetized rat at baseline and at various times after PQ treatment (180 mg/kg, i.v.).

Fig 1

QTc value in each panel denotes rate-corrected QT interval derived using normalized Bazett’s formula QTc = QT/(RR/f)1/2, where f = 180 ms.

Effects of PQ on contractile force in Langendorff-perfused rat hearts

The acute effects of PQ (33 or 60 μM) on contractility in LV myocardium were examined in Langendorff-perfused rat hearts. As shown in Fig 2, PQ decreased LV developed pressure (LVDP) and the maximal rate of rising (+dP/dtmax) and fall (–dP/dtmax) of LV pressure in isolated hearts in a concentration-dependent manner. On average (n = 10 for both groups), LVDP decreased from a baseline value of 30.1 ± 10.7 to 18.1 ± 6.9 mmHg and from 25.6 ± 6.4 to 8.5 ± 5.1 mmHg after 60 min treatment with 33 and 60 μM PQ, respectively (p < 0.0001). LV +dP/dtmax decreased from a baseline value of 950.7 ± 286.3 to 581.6 ± 183.7 mmHg/s and from 773.3 ± 164.8 to 272.4 ± 167.7 mmHg/s with the application of 33 and 60 μM PQ, respectively (p < 0.0001). LV–dP/dtmax decreased from –600.8 ± 271.4 to –387.1 ± 167.5 mmHg/s and from –532.1 ± 116.4 to –177.0 ± 105.4 mmHg/s with the application of 33 and 60 μM PQ, respectively (p < 0.0001). In contrast, administration of the corresponding volume of normal saline had no changes in any of the LV pressure parameters (S2 Fig).

Fig 2.

Fig 2

Representative tracings of LVP (upper) and dP/dt (lower) signals recorded from Langendorff-perfused rat hearts paced at 300 beats/min at baseline and following treatment with 33 μM (A) or 60 μM PQ (B).

Effects of PQ on intracellular Ca2+ transients and cell shortening in rat ventricular myocytes

Fig 3 shows the continuous (panel A) and expanded recordings (panel B) and the summarized data (panels C and D) of the PQ effects (10–60 μM) on Ca2+ transients (fura-2 fluorescence ratio F340/F380) and cell shortening in rat ventricular myocytes. PQ decreased cell shortening in a concentration-dependent manner (Fig 3C). However, PQ did not affect the time-to-peak of cell shortening and time to 50% relengthening (S3A and S3B Fig). PQ also decreased the amplitude of the fluorescence ratio (Ca2+ transients) in a concentration-dependent manner (Fig 3D). However, it had no apparent effect on the time to peak (S3C Fig) and decay time constant of the Ca2+ transients (S3D Fig). However, the application of the corresponding volumes of normal saline produced no changes in any of these parameters (S4 Fig).

Effects of PQ on K+ currents in rat isolated ventricular myocytes

To separate the K+ currents from overlapping currents, Na+ and Ca2+ inward currents were blocked with 30 μM TTX and 1 mM Co2+, respectively. Typical current traces recorded in response to depolarizing and hyperpolarizing steps to test potentials between +60 and −140 mV from a holding potential of −80 mV are shown in Fig 4A. PQ (3 and 10 μM) moderately reduced the amplitude of peak outward K+ current (Ito) but had no significant effect on inward rectifier K+ current (IK1). PQ also reduced the amplitude of steady-state outward K+ current (Iss) at the end of 400-ms long clamp steps. Fig 4B and 4C shows the current density–voltage (I−V) relationship for the peak currents and Iss before and after the addition of PQ (1, 3, and 10 μM), respectively. The percent inhibition of Ito integral by PQ was not significantly dependent on the step potentials (Fig 4D).

Fig 4. Effect of PQ on K+ currents.

Fig 4

(A) Families of current traces elicited by a series of 400-ms long depolarizing or hyperpolarizing pulses from a holding potential of −80 mV in the absence and presence of 3 and 10 μM PQ. (B, C) Averaged I–V relationship for Ito and IK1 peak currents (B) and Iss (C) observed in the absence, and presence of 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ. Peak Ito current was measured as the difference between the peak current and the steady-state current at the end of the pulse. Iss current was measured as the steady-state current at the end of the pulse. Each data point indicates mean ± SD from 5 myocytes. (D) Percent inhibition of the Ito integral by 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ calculated at different depolarizing potentials. Data points are mean ± SD (n = 5). (E) Original superimposed families of current traces generated by 400-ms depolarizing pulses to +40 mV from a holding potential of −80 mV in the absence or presence of increasing PQ concentrations. The arrow indicates the zero current density level. (F) Concentration–response curve for the effect of PQ on the integral of Ito at +40 mV. Data points are mean ± SD (n = 5). The continuous line was drawn according to the fitting of the Hill equation.

The effect of PQ on Ito was investigated further by analyzing its concentration dependence. Ito was elicited by a depolarizing pulse to +40 mV from a holding potential of −80 mV. Fig 4E shows superimposed K+ current traces before and after cumulative superfusion with 3 and 10 μM PQ. The decay of currents during an activating clamp step in control conditions and after administration with 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ were well fitted by a single exponential function: Ito (t) = A1 exp (−t/τ) + A0, where A1 and τ are the initial amplitude and time constant of inactivation, respectively. A0 is a time-independent component. The average value of the decay time constant (τ) was 38.7 ± 13.4 ms (n = 5) under control conditions. In the presence of 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ, decay τ were 37.7 ± 1.3, 49.3 ± 16.2, and 52.1 ± 19.8 ms, respectively (p = 0.26, n = 5). PQ had no significant effect on the decay time course of Ito. Fig 4F illustrates the percent reduction of the Ito integral as a function of the PQ concentration logarithm. The data were fitted with a Hill equation to obtain a concentration-response curve. The calculated IC50 for Ito was 2.4 μM, with an Emax of 35.4% inhibition and an nH of 2.4 (n = 5).

Effects of PQ on steady-state activation, inactivation, and recovery from inactivation of Ito

The predrug superimposed current traces are shown in Fig 5A, and the voltage dependence of steady-state activation and inactivation curves of Ito are shown in Fig 5B. PQ caused a leftward shift of the steady-state inactivation relationship of Ito without affecting its slope factor k (Fig 5B). Under control conditions (n = 5), mean half-inactivation potential (Vh) was calculated as –24.7 ± 9.8 mV and k as –4.9 ± 1.9 mV. Mean Vh were –39.9 ± 5.6, –48.5 ± 6.6, and –50.5 ± 8.1 mV and k were –4.9 ± 2.0, –4.9 ± 2.0, and –4.0 ± 0.3 mV in the presence of 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ, respectively (p = 0.007 for Vh and p = 0.7 for k). The activation curves shown in Fig 5B were obtained from the normalized conductance of Ito channels (Gto/Gto, max) calculated from the Ito amplitude data obtained in Fig 4A and 4B. Mean half-activation potential (Vh) and k values were 14.9 ± 11.9 and 10.4 ± 1.6 mV (n = 4), respectively, under control conditions. PQ caused a leftward shift of the voltage dependence for activation to negative potentials. Mean Vh were –2.5 ± 7.7, –14.4 ± 15.2, and –9.6 ± 9.1 mV and k were 11.3 ± 0.9, 18.9 ± 3.9, and 21.4 ± 4.4 mV in the presence of 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ, respectively (p = 0.029 for Vh and p = 0.012 for k). The effect of PQ on the recovery kinetics of Ito was also examined (Fig 5C and 5D). Recovery curves in the absence and presence of PQ were well fitted by a single-exponential function. As shown in Fig 5D, PQ had no significant effect on the recovery time course of Ito. The mean recovery time constant was 44.2 ± 31.5 ms (n = 5) under control conditions. Recovery time constants of Ito were 51.8 ± 33.0, 64.6 ± 45.1, and 94.2 ± 108.3 ms (p = 0.38) in the presence of 1, 3, and 10 μM PQ, respectively.

Fig 5. Voltage dependence of steady-state Ito activation and inactivation in the absence and presence of 3 μM PQ.

Fig 5

Steady-state inactivation was examined with a double-pulse protocol: A conditioning 400 ms pulse to various potentials ranging from −80 to +10 mV was followed by a test depolarizing pulse to +60 mV (B, inset). The holding potential was −80 mV. The predrug superimposed current traces are shown in A. The inactivation curves for Ito were obtained by normalizing the current amplitudes (I) to the maximal value (Imax) and plotted as a function of the conditioning potentials before and after PQ (n = 5). The activation curves were obtained from the normalized conductance of Ito channels (Gto/Gto, max), which were calculated from the Ito amplitude in Fig 4B and plotted as a function of the depolarizing potentials (n = 5). The solid lines drawn through the data points were best fitted to the Boltzmann equation. (C, D) Effects of PQ on reactivation of Ito. The twin-pulse protocol consisted of two identical 200 ms depolarizing pulses to +60 mV from a holding potential of −80 mV (D, inset), and the prepulse–test pulse interval varied between 10 and 550 ms. An example of the recovery of Ito from inactivation in control conditions is shown in C. The normalized currents (fractional recovery) obtained in the absence and presence of 3 μM PQ were plotted as a function of the recovery time. The solid lines represent a single exponential fit to the data in the absence and presence of 3 μM PQ (n = 5), respectively.

Discussion

The present study investigated the hemodynamic and cardiac electromechanical effects of acute paraquat exposure in rats. The major findings of this study are as follows: (1) PQ decreased heart rate, arterial blood pressure, and cardiac contractility, as well as prolonged the PR, QRS, QT, and QTc intervals in a dose-dependent manner in anesthetized rats; (2) PQ decreased LV developed pressure and contractility in the Langendorff-perfused rat hearts; (3) PQ decreased both the amplitude of Ca2+ transients and fractional cell shortening in a concentration-dependent manner in rat ventricular myocytes; and (4) PQ suppressed Ito and Iss channels and reduced the availability and altered the gating kinetics of Ito channels. The findings provide novel evidence for acute PQ exposure-induced cardiac performance and mechanical dysfunctions as well as electrical disturbances.

A broad spectrum of cardiovascular effects ranging from minimal changes on the ECG to acute and extensive myocardial necrosis has been clinically observed in human acute PQ poisoning [10]. Severely poisoned patients expire from a rapid progression of myocardial depression and irreversible circulatory shock in the acute and subacute phases of PQ poisoning [22]. A rapid PQ accumulation into the heart but not in the lung or kidney is a significant cause of mortality in the early stage of PQ poisoning when a large amount of paraquat (364 mg/kg) was ingested in rats [7]. Previous studies have reported that the PQ dose is a critical prognostic factor for predicting mortality in PQ poisoning patients [23,24]. The clinical presentation of PQ intoxication can be distinguished by the following groups: (1) mild poisoning (<20 mg/kg BW) where the patients have minor symptoms in the gastrointestinal system; (2) moderate to severe poisoning (20–40 mg/kg BW) where the patients develop renal and lung injuries and mortality is usually delayed for 2–3 weeks; and (3) fulminant poisoning (>40 mg/kg BW) wherein this PQ dose causes multiple organ failure, leading to mortality within hours and never delayed for more than a few days [7]. The lethal doses of PQ poisoning in rodents are generally much higher compared with those in humans [7]. Here, the dosages of 100 and 180 mg/kg (approximately twice and triple LD50 in a rat study, respectively) were used for in vivo study and a concentration range of 1–60 μM in vitro to simulate the mild, moderate to severe, and massive poisoning in clinical situations. Although the intoxication dosages are much higher in rats, the current study showed that the dose-dependent cardiac suppressive effects of PQ are comparable to the clinical conditions in PQ poisoning cases.

Our in vivo study revealed that PQ exposure exhibited a dose- and time-dependent hypotensive effect. A previous study showed that PQ did not cause any vasorelaxant effect on phenylephrine-precontracted rat aortic rings with intact endothelium [25]. It is conceivable that PQ-induced hypotensive response may be attributable mainly to its direct cardiac suppressive effects as manifested by its reduction of heart rate and LV contractility. In general, any decreases in either the depolarizing (e.g., funny channel, T-type or L-type Ca2+ currents) or the repolarizing (e.g., delayed outward K+ current) currents of the SA node may all cause the bradycardiac effect [26]. Thus, further studies are needed to clarify whether PQ could suppress the SA nodal ionic currents and thereby decrease the heart rate. PQ exposure prolonged the QRS duration suggesting that the ventricular excitability could also be suppressed. As PQ administration also dose-dependently prolonged the P wave duration and P-R interval, which denote atrial depolarization time and atrial-ventricular (AV nodal) conduction interval, respectively, some mortality rate arising from severe SA nodal/atrial or AV nodal blockade is possible.

During cardiac excitation-contraction coupling, Ca2+ enters the myocyte mainly through the L-type Ca2+ channels following an action potential and triggers further Ca2+ release from the sarcoplasmic reticulum (SR) [26]. The PQ-induced negative inotropic effect in the present study could be explained by its reduction of the amplitude of intracellular Ca2+ transients. Depression of contractility was also observed in ventricular myocytes obtained from rats chronically treated with a lower PQ dose (10 mg/kg/day) for 3 weeks [27]. Although the authors observed a reduction in the amplitude of cell shortening, any notable change in the amplitude and kinetics of Ca2+ transients was not observed. The authors speculated that decreased cell shortening could be explained by altered myofilament sensitivity to Ca2+ when using lower PQ doses at chronic exposure. However, decreased cell shortening could be attributed to the reduced amplitude of Ca2+ transients during acute- and high-dose PQ exposure as shown in the present study. In addition to changes in Ca2+ transients, PQ-induced ROS production and subsequent development of oxidative stress may cause defects in transporter and channel functions [28], leading to perturbed Ca2+ homeostasis and cardiac dysfunction. A previous study has demonstrated that PQ exposure-induced myocardial damage and contractile dysfunction are mediated by TLR4 activation and the associated secretion of proinflammatory cytokines [14]. Another study revealed that the endothelin system may be involved in the cardiac dysfunction triggered by PQ exposure for 48 h in mice, as evidenced in endothelin receptor A knockout attenuating the PQ-induced contractile dysfunction and Ca2+ mishandling [15]. More recently, a study conducted by Zhang et al. suggested that the RIP1/RIP3/MLKL‐dependent necroptosis pathway with oxidative stress may also contribute to the deranged Ca2+ handling and contractile dysfunction in mice treated with PQ (45 mg/kg) for 48 h [29]. In contrast to the aforementioned pieces of literature [15,29], which showed that the smaller amplitude of Ca2+ transient was associated with a longer decay time course in cardiomyocytes from animals with PQ exposure, our in vitro study demonstrated a similar effect in Ca2+ transient amplitude but with no change in the decay time in myocytes following short-term PQ incubation. The differential effects can be attributable to the difference in experimental conditions (e.g., animal species, exposure dose/time course, ex vivo or in vitro, and so on). The longer decay time of Ca2+ transients in previous ex vivo studies may implicate that the sequestration of Ca2+ by SR Ca2+ pump is impaired and may thereby decrease the Ca2+ content of SR [25]. In our study, the PQ-induced decrease in Ca2+ transients could be possibly due to its suppression of Ca2+ influx through the Ca2+ channels because no delay of decay time was observed. Further studies are needed to clarify this issue.

Until now, the underlying mechanism of PQ-induced cardiac electrical defects is not yet defined. This study provided an important new insight into the cellular mechanism underlying the PQ-induced QTc prolongation. Voltage-gated K+ channels are known to play a crucial role in determining the shape and duration of the cardiac action potential. Ito is generally considered an important repolarizing current in the mammalian action potential, including in human and rat atrium and ventricle [30,31]. The data showed that Ito, which is responsible for the early phase of repolarization, and Iss, which may contribute to the late phase of repolarization of the rat cardiac action potential, were differentially blocked by PQ exposure. PQ did not affect the Ito decay time suggesting that it did not affect the conversion of open channels to an inactivated state. Furthermore, the kinetic analysis showed that PQ caused a leftward shift of the Ito inactivation curve and affected the voltage dependence for activation while it did not affect its recovery from inactivation. This finding suggests that PQ may preferentially bind inactivated channels, which could thereby decrease the number of resting Ito channels available for activation. The suppression of K+ currents may retard ventricular repolarization and contribute to the prolongation of action potential duration and QTc interval which may promote the occurrence of triggered activity and arrhythmias [12].

The prolonged QTc interval has been clinically associated with mortality from intoxication with several kinds of pesticides (e.g., PQ and organophosphates) [11,32]. QTc prolongation also affects mortality rates in patients with a variety of cardiac diseases (e.g., coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure) [33,34]. Moreover, prolonged QTc interval seems to correlate with poorer LV function. For example, QTc interval may represent an additional marker of LV systolic dysfunction in patients with anterior acute myocardial infarction [35]. Moreover, prolonged QTc interval appeared to correlate with LV dysfunction observed by echocardiography in patients who received anthracycline treatment [36]. In this context, the observations in this study such as prolongation of the QTc interval and suppression of contractility in isolated hearts, together with decreased cell shortening in ventricular myocytes may contribute to the cardiotoxicity of acute PQ poisoning.

Treatment of the most severely PQ-intoxicated patients remains a tremendous challenge nowadays. One of the current treatment modalities is immunosuppressive therapy. Some authors claimed that immunosuppressive therapy may have benefits in treating PQ poisoning patients who expired from lung fibrosis-related hypoxemia [37,38]. However, the methodological problems limit its application [39]. Moreover, the largest randomized controlled trial completed to date also reported no benefit of this therapy [40]. It seems that immunosuppressive therapy should have no beneficial effect in treating the most severe form of PQ intoxicated patients who suffered from a cardiovascular collapse in the early stage of poisoning. Other therapeutic strategies seem promising in animal studies mostly emerging from the suppression of PQ-induced oxidative stress or inflammatory response. Among them, lysine acetylsalicylate (200 mg/kg), which also can chelate PQ, confers a potent protective effect against PQ toxicity [41]. Atorvastatin, a lipid lowering drug, has been recently shown to attenuate PQ-induced cardiotoxicity in a rat model through similar mechanisms [42]. The results from a retrospective study demonstrated that edaravone, a free radical scavenger with an anti-inflammatory effect, protected the kidneys and liver but did not reduce pulmonary fibrosis and survival rate in patients with paraquat poisoning [43]. Currently, finding an effective strategy for the treatment of PQ-induced toxicity is attracting the attention of researchers.

Conclusions

In summary, this study demonstrated that acute paraquat exposure produces negative hemodynamic and electromechanical effects in rat hearts. The cellular-suppressive effect on the contractility and voltage-gated K+ channels of the myocytes could be applied with caution to explain the inevitable death of fulminant paraquat poisoning cases. It seems no efficient treatment modalities may be currently used to reverse the harmful effects on the heart in paraquat poisoning patients. However, an improved understanding of how PQ causes cardiac suppression and electrical disturbances provided by the current study may aid in the development of new treatment modalities.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Representative recordings of arterial pressure, LV pressure (LVP), first derivative of LV pressure (LV dP/dt), and ECG from an anesthetized rat at baseline and at various times after treatment with normal saline (1 mL/kg, i.v.).

(DOCX)

S2 Fig. Effects of saline vehicle (0.03%) on LV pressure (LVP) in isolated hearts paced at 300 beats/min.

(DOCX)

S3 Fig. Effects of paraquat on kinetic parameters of cell shortening and intracellular Ca2+ transients in rat ventricular myocytes.

(DOCX)

S4 Fig. Effects of saline vehicle on Ca2+ transients (represented by fura-2 fluorescence ratio F340/F380) and cell shortening in rat ventricular myocytes paced at 1 Hz.

(DOCX)

S1 Table. Baseline hemodynamic and electrocardiographic parameters in anesthetized rats receiving the vehicle or PQ at a dose of 100 or 180 mg/kg.

(DOCX)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan (grants CMRPG 381571-3) to C.C. Lin. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation.

References

  • 1.Dinis-Oliveira RJ, Duarte JA, Sanchez-Navarro A, Remiao F, Bastos ML, et al. (2008) Paraquat poisonings: mechanisms of lung toxicity, clinical features, and treatment. Crit Rev Toxicol 38: 13–71. 10.1080/10408440701669959 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Naito H, Yamashita M (1987) Epidemiology of paraquat in Japan and a new safe formulation of paraquat. Hum Toxicol 6: 87–88. 10.1177/096032718700600114 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Onyon LJ, Volans GN (1987) The epidemiology and prevention of paraquat poisoning. Hum Toxicol 6: 19–29. 10.1177/096032718700600104 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Yang CC, Wu JF, Ong HC, Hung SC, Kuo YP, et al. (1996) Taiwan National Poison Center: epidemiologic data 1985–1993. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 34: 651–663. 10.3109/15563659609013825 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Seok SJ, Gil HW, Jeong DS, Yang JO, Lee EY, et al. (2009) Paraquat intoxication in subjects who attempt suicide: why they chose paraquat. Korean J Intern Med 24: 247–251. 10.3904/kjim.2009.24.3.247 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bismuth C, Garnier R, Dally S, Fournier PE, Scherrmann JM (1982) Prognosis and treatment of paraquat poisoning: a review of 28 cases. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 19: 461–474. 10.3109/15563658208992501 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Vale JA, Meredith TJ, Buckley BM (1987) Paraquat poisoning: clinical features and immediate general management. Hum Toxicol 6: 41–47. 10.1177/096032718700600107 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Parkinson C (1980) The changing pattern of paraquat poisoning in man. Histopathology 4: 171–183. 10.1111/j.1365-2559.1980.tb02910.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Leroy JP, Volant A, Guedes Y, Briere J (1982) [Massive poisoning by paraquat with early death (19 hours). Apropos of a case with ultrastructure study]. Ann Pathol 2: 332–335. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Noguchi N, Tanaka E, Yamamoto H, Misawa S (1990) Initial accumulation of paraquat in the heart leading to acute death. Nihon Hoigaku Zasshi 44: 6–11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lin CC, Liao SC, Shih CP, Hsu KH (2014) QTc prolongation as a useful prognostic factor in acute paraquat poisoning. J Emerg Med 47(4): 401–7. 10.1016/j.jemermed.2014.02.026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Tomaselli GF, Beuckelmann DJ, Calkins HG, Berger RD, Kessler PD, Lawrence JH, et al. (1994) Sudden cardiac death in heart failure. The role of abnormal repolarization. Circulation 90: 2534–2539. 10.1161/01.cir.90.5.2534 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Davey P (2000) QT interval lengthening in cardiac disease relates more to left ventricular systolic dysfunction than to autonomic function. Eur J Heart Fail 2: 265–271. 10.1016/s1388-9842(00)00065-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Póvoa R, Maciel FM, Orlando JM, Povoa EF, Honsi E, et al. (1992) [A cardiac lesion secondary to paraquat]. Arq Bras Cardiol 59: 95–98. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Dong XS, Xu XY, Sun YQ, Wei-Liu, Jiang ZH, et al. (2013) Toll-like receptor 4 is involved in myocardial damage following paraquat poisoning in mice. Toxicol 312: 115–122. 10.1016/j.tox.2013.08.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Wang J, Lu S, Zheng Q, Hu N, Yu W, et al. (2016) Cardiac-specific knockout of ETA receptor mitigates paraquat-induced cardiac contractile dysfunction. Cardiovasc Toxicol 16: 235–43. 10.1007/s12012-015-9331-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Chang ZS, Xia JB, Wu HY, Peng WT, Jiang FQ, et al. (2019) Forkhead box O3 protects the heart against paraquat-induced aging-associated phenotypes by upregulating the expression of antioxidant enzymes. Aging Cell 18(5): e12990. 10.1111/acel.12990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Gawarammana IB, Buckley NA (2011) Medical management of paraquat ingestion. Br J Clin Pharmacol 72: 745–757. 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2011.04026.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Chang GJ, Yeh YH, Chen WJ, Ko YS, Pang JHS, Lee HY (2019) Inhibition of advanced glycation end products formation attenuates cardiac electrical and mechanical remodeling and vulnerability to tachyarrhythmias in diabetic rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 368: 66–78. 10.1124/jpet.118.252080 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kmecova J, Klimas J (2010) Heart rate correction of the QT duration in rats. Eur J Pharmacol 641: 187–92. 10.1016/j.ejphar.2010.05.038 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Chang GJ, Yeh YH, Lin TP, Chang CJ, Chen WJ (2014) Electromechanical and atrial and ventricular antiarrhythmic actions of CIJ-3-2F, a novel benzyl-furoquinoline vasodilator in rat heart. Br J Pharmacol 171: 3918–3937. 10.1111/bph.12752 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lee HL, Lin HJ, Yeh ST, Chi CH, Guo HR (2008) Presentations of patients of poisoning and predictors of poisoning-related fatality: findings from a hospital-based prospective study. BMC Public Health 8: 7. 10.1186/1471-2458-8-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Proudfoot AT, Stewart MS, Levitt T, Widdop B (1979) Paraquat poisoning: significance of plasma-paraquat concentrations. Lancet 2: 330–332. 10.1016/s0140-6736(79)90345-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Scherrmann JM, Houze P, Bismuth C, Bourdon R (1987) Prognostic value of plasma and urine paraquat concentration. Hum Toxicol 6: 91–93. 10.1177/096032718700600116 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Chan YC, Chang SC, Hsuan SL, Chien MS, Lee WC, Kang JJ, et al. (2007) Cardiovascular effects of herbicides and formulated adjuvants on isolated rat aorta and heart. Toxicol In Vitro 21: 595–603. 10.1016/j.tiv.2006.12.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Bers DM (2002) Cardiac excitation-contraction coupling. Nature 415: 198–205. 10.1038/415198a [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Fahim MA, Howarth FC, Nemmar A, Qureshi MA, Shafiullah M, et al. (2013) Vitamin E ameliorates the decremental effect of paraquat on cardiomyocyte contractility in rats. PLoS One 8: e57651. 10.1371/journal.pone.0057651 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Wagner S, Rokita AG, Anderson ME, Maier LS (2013) Redox regulation of sodium and calcium handling. Antioxid Redox Signal 18: 1063–1077. 10.1089/ars.2012.4818 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Zhang L, Feng Q, Wang T. (2018) Necrostatin-1 protects against paraquat-induced cardiac contractile dysfunction via RIP1-RIP3-MLKL-dependent necroptosis pathway. Cardiovasc Toxicol 18: 346–355. 10.1007/s12012-017-9441-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Josephson IR, Sanchez-Chapula J, Brown AM (1984) Early outward current in rat single ventricular cells. Circ Res 54: 157–162. 10.1161/01.res.54.2.157 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Nabauer M, Beuckelmann DJ, Erdmann E (1993) Characteristics of transient outward current in human ventricular myocytes from patients with terminal heart failure. Circ Res 73: 386–394. 10.1161/01.res.73.2.386 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Liu SH, Lin JL, Weng CH, Yang HY, Hsu CW, et al. (2012) Heart rate-corrected QT interval helps predict mortality after intentional organophosphate poisoning. PLoS One 7: e36576. 10.1371/journal.pone.0036576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Padmanabhan S, Silvet H, Amin J, Pai RG (2003) Prognostic value of QT interval and QT dispersion in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: results from a cohort of 2265 patients with an ejection fraction of < or = 40%. Am Heart J 145: 132–138. 10.1067/mhj.2003.59 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Foroughi M, Karkhaneh Yousefi Z, Majidi Tehrani M, Noori Foroutaghe A, Ghanavati A, et al. (2009) Prolonged QT interval and coronary artery bypass mortality due to heart failure. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann 17: 604–607. 10.1177/0218492309349068 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Stajer D, Mozina H, Noc M, Rode P (1993) Correlation between QTc interval duration and left ventricular systolic dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Electrocardiol 26: 333–340. 10.1016/0022-0736(93)90054-h [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Horacek JM, Jakl M, Horackova J, Pudil R, Jebavy L, et al. (2009) Assessment of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity with electrocardiography. Exp Oncol 31: 115–117. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Lin JL, Lin-Tan DT, Chen KH, Huang WH, Hsu CW, et al. (2011) Improved survival in severe paraquat poisoning with repeated pulse therapy of cyclophosphamide and steroids. Intensive Care Med 37: 1006–1013. 10.1007/s00134-010-2127-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Wu WP, Lai MN, Lin CH, Li YF, Lin C, et al. (2014) Addition of immunosuppressive treatment to hemoperfusion is associated with improved survival after paraquat poisoning: A nationwide study. PLoS One 9: e87568. 10.1371/journal.pone.0087568 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Li LR, Sydenham E, Chaudhary B, Beecher D, You C. (2014) Glucocorticoid with cyclophosphamide for paraquat-induced lung fibrosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8: CD008084. 10.1002/14651858.CD008084.pub4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Gawarammana I, Buckley NA, Mohammed F, Naser K, Jeganathan K. et al. (2012) A randomised controlled trial of high-dose immunosuppression in paraquat poisoning. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 50: 278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Dinis-Oliveira RJ, Pontes H, Bastos ML, Remião F, Duarte JA, et al. (2009) An effective antidote for paraquat poisonings: the treatment with lysine acetylsalicylate. Toxicol 255: 187–93. 10.1016/j.tox.2008.10.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Malekinejad M, Masoumi Verki M, Khoramjouy M, Alenabi A, Hallaj-Salahipour M, et al. (2019) Cardioprotective effects of atorvastatin are mediated through PPARγ in paraquat-exposed rats. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 74: 400–408. 10.1097/FJC.0000000000000731 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Yi R, Zhizhou Y, Zhaorui S, Wei Z, Xin C, et al.(2019) Retrospective study of clinical features and prognosis of edaravone in the treatment of paraquat poisoning. Medicine (Baltimore) 98: e15441. 10.1097/MD.0000000000015441 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Richard T Clements

10 Sep 2020

PONE-D-20-15928

Hemodynamic and electromechanical effects of paraquat in rat heart

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Chang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

Thank you for submitting "Hemodynamic and electromechanical effects of paraquat in rat heart". Two reviewers have completed review and have raised some valid critiques which should be addressed upon revison. In addition, I would like you to address reasons for the relatively low hemodynamic values observed in the langendorff perfused hearts ( perfusion pressure etc...). Also relating to the langendorff experiments, it is not clear if separate untreated control hearts were run for the duration (60 min) or if the shown control is just pre-values, an untreated 60 min control would be ideal. Please clarify this in addition to the reviewers comments in your response. There were some noted strengths of the work identified including the patch clamp analysis and other figures, and we would like to reconsider a revised version of the manuscript.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript within 3-4 months. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Richard T. Clements, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2.  Please clarify how many rats were used in the in vivo experiment, and how many were in the control group versus the paraquat group.

3. Please clarify how many rats were used in the in vitro experiment.

4. Please carefully proofread your manuscript for typographical errors. For example, “The rats was anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium …” should be the “The rats were anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium …”

5. Please specify in your methods section the method of sacrifice, particularly for the control rats in the in vivo experiment.

6. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 6 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

7. Please include a caption for figure 6.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Chang et al. investigated the cardiotoxic effect of acute paraquat poisoning in a rat model. The study focused on contractile performance and electrophysiology of rat hearts and isolated cardiac myocytes using high doses of paraquat. The authors show an inhibitory effect of paraquat on heart rate, cardiac contractility, intracellular calcium, and repolarization of the heart using well known physiology and electrophysiology techniques. The authors also propose a mechanism for the repolarization abnormalities involving a paraquat mediated effects of outward potassium current kinetics and gating (Ito).

Although this study provides some insight into a mechanism that may mediate the cardiotoxic effects of paraquat, there key concerns that must be addressed before consideration of publication.

1) There are numerous grammatical mistakes within the text. Consider utilizing a proofreading service to identify and correct the grammar before resubmitting.

2) There are multiple studies that have investigated the cellular mechanisms of paraquat poisoning in the heart of rodent models. In fact, several studies have previously reported deficits to cardiomyocyte contractility and intracellular calcium levels (Dong XS et al. 2014; Zhang L et al. 2018; Wang J et al., 2015). Please provide a more comprehensive elaboratation on the previously published findings of paraquat cardiac toxicity and how the findings in your present study are novel, support or differ from what has previously been reported in the introduction and/or discussion sections.

3) The authors used a dosage of 100-180mg/kg of paraquat for the in vivo studies and a concentration of 1-60µM paraquat in vitro. Please provide a clear justification for the use of different concentrations in different studies and how they can be compared. Also, how do the chosen concentrations of paraquat relate to human paraquat poisoning cases.

4) Did any mice did after receiving the paraquat dose in vivo. It would be important to mention the mortality rate in your in vivo injections and if changes to QTc are associated with earlier/later mortality.

5) It should be discussed why it reduced HR. Is it likely it has an effect on the SA node and funny current or depolarization/repolarization time? Did it cause any SA/AV node block?

6) Why was the standard Bazett correction chosen to normalize the QT interval to heart rate in this study? It is known that QTc is over and under estimated at high and low heart rates, respectively. This overestimation is apparent in data presented in table 1 where the average QTc intervals are essentially the same length as the average RR intervals. A normalized Bazett formula, which normalizes QT to average rat RR interval (Kmecova J et al. 2010), has been applied successfully in rodent QT interval correction.

7) Why was QTc the only ECG wave parameter reported in table 1? Based on the raw ECG traces in Figure 1, there seems to be visible changes occurring to more than QT interval such as changes to the P wave and QRS wave. Increased QRS duration also contributes to QT interval so it would be important to know if there is a change in the QRS complex occurring and would add to the novelty of the data.

8) For the studies depicted in figure 3, the same cells were used for control and paraquat administration. Could the parameters have declined naturally over time? Were any controls run for the same amount of time to determine what the change in calcium or shortening occurred with time and to compare to the difference in paraquat. It is also not entirely clear what statistical analysis was performed on the cardiac myocyte shortening and calcium imaging data; if the same cells are used as the control group then the appropriate statistical analysis would be a repeated measures ANOVA.

9) It is not entirely clear how the statistics were analyzed and what P values were obtained for the data points in Figure 4, panels B-D.

Minor comments:

1) line 116,: tyrodes solution component are shown in “µM” however it should be “mM”. Please confirm that all usages of “µM” are correct throughout the text.

2) Please indicate incubation times for paraquat within the methods as it is not entirely clear from the results.

3) Was not able to find Table S1 linked with the manuscript submission

4) Supplemental figure S1 is duplicated as figure 4 in the submission.

5) The discussion is repetitive in describing results in some places. For example the same results are described on lines 329-334 as on lines 342-346.

Reviewer #2: This study from Chih-Chuan Lin and colleagues aimed to investigate the mechanisms by which the herbicide paraquat (PQ) causes cardiotoxicity. Investigations performed on rats included in vivo analysis of cardiac hemodynamics, ex vivo Langendorff heart perfusions, and measurements of intracellular Ca2+ transients and K+ currents in isolated cardiomyocytes. The investigators found that PQ decreased cardiac contractility and increased QTc interval, decreased the amplitude of Ca2+ transients and suppressed K+ currents. The experiments were carefully executed, although the novel mechanistic insights gained from those experiments are limited to the inhibition of K+ currents. The role of this novel finding in the cardiotoxic effects of PQ should be better integrated in the available literature on the topic.

1- In the abstract and the introduction, the authors make the point that the mechanism of acute PQ poisoning induced cardiotoxicity is poorly understood. There are however, several studies which previously reported involvement of inflammation and oxidative stress through pathways involving the proteins TLR4, ETA and FoxO3 (see PMID 23969119, PMID 26089164 and PMID 31264342). Those mechanisms should be mentioned in the text (particularly in the introduction which is no covering the current state of knowledge the way it is presently written). In addition, the discussion should elaborate on how the new mechanistic findings (inhibition of K+ channels by PQ) relate to those previously reported cardiotoxic mechanisms.

2- Similarly, the authors conclude in their discussion that there is currently no established treatment for PQ poisoning, besides some claims about the potential usefulness of immunosuppressive therapies. There are, however, a few other therapies which have been explored for PQ-induced cardiotoxicity (see for example PMID 31425380 regarding the use of atorvastatin, PMID 31083174 with edaravone, and PMID 19026709 with lysine acetylsalicylate) and these should be cited as well.

3- Although it is somewhat discussed on page 19, could the authors be more specific about the relationship between the PQ doses used for in vivo and ex vivo experiments and the levels reported in cases of human poisoning? In other words, have the doses used for the present experiments been reported in poisoned individuals, thereby reinforcing the clinical relevance of the study?

4- Figure 1: A “Control 3h” should also be presented on that figure.

5- Figure 4 (labeled by mistake as Figure 5 in manuscript): The y axes from the graphs presenting the current traces in panel A should include more values to have a better idea of the amplitudes in each condition depicted. Panels B, C, D, E: Any significant differences between curves and points should be indicated on the graphs.

Minor comments:

1- Line 74: Per journal requirements, the ethics statement on animal research should also indicate that “all efforts were made to minimize animal suffering”.

2- Line 236: Table 1 is referred to as TableS1

3- Line 268: “PQ” is missing from that sentence.

4- Figure S1 also appears in the manuscript as Figure 4, therefore the labeling of figures starting with figure 4 is not accurate in the text.

5- Lines 303-307: This information should be reported in the Methods section only.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Apr 1;16(4):e0234591. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234591.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


17 Feb 2021

Response to Editor’s comment:

Thank you for submitting "Hemodynamic and electromechanical effects of paraquat in rat heart". Two reviewers have completed review and have raised some valid critiques which should be addressed upon revison. In addition, I would like you to address reasons for the relatively low hemodynamic values observed in the langendorff perfused hearts (perfusion pressure etc...). Also relating to the langendorff experiments, it is not clear if separate untreated control hearts were run for the duration (60 min) or if the shown control is just pre-values, an untreated 60 min control would be ideal. Please clarify this in addition to the reviewers comments in your response. There were some noted strengths of the work identified including the patch clamp analysis and other figures, and we would like to reconsider a revised version of the manuscript.

Authors: First of all, we thank the Editor’s comments, giving us the opportunity to revise the manuscript and implement the study with new experiments. The observed amplitude of cardiac performance parameters obtained from the Langendorff-perfused heart study may depend on various factors such as the conditions of perfusion pressure setting (eg, constant perfusion pressure of 55 mmHg in our study) and predrug equilibration time. To acquire reliable parameters after vehicle or drug treatment for at least 1 hour period, we allowed the preparations to equilibrate for 2-2.5 hours to reach the steady-state LV pressure (LVP) value before the commencement of experiments. This time setting was determined by our predrug equilibration time control experiment. We observed that the initial LVP and its derivative were high at the time following the insertion of balloon cathether and then gradually declined within around 2 hours. The averaged initial value of LVP obtained from 8 hearts was 59.9 ± 11.3 mmHg and the value declined to 55.4 ± 7.4, 45.0 ± 6.3, 37.7 ± 6.8 and 35.6 ± 7.2 mmHg following 1, 1.5, 2 and 2.5 hours observation periods, respectively. The initial value of the maximal rise velocity of LV pressure (LV +dP/dt)max was 2192 ± 481 mmHg/s and declined to 2011 ± 360, 1647 ± 379, 1442 ± 362 and 1407 ± 303 mmHg/s following 1, 1.5, 2 and 2.5 hours, respectively.

Exactly, the control traces in Figure 2A and B and the baseline values presented in the text denote pre-drug waveforms and pre-values, respectively. As your suggestion, a corresponding vehicle and time control study run for 60 min had been performed and the data have been included in the revised manuscript as Supplemental Figure S2.

============================================================

Response to Editor’s requirement:

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

Authors: We are sure that our manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements.

2. Please clarify how many rats were used in the in vivo experiment, and how many were in the control group versus the paraquat group.

Authors: A total of 30 animals were used in the in vivo experiment; 10 animals each in vehicle group, paraquat 100 mg/kg group, and 180 mg/kg group.

3. Please clarify how many rats were used in the in vitro experiment.

Authors: A total of 71 rats were used in the in vitro experiment; 28 rats were used for isolated heart study, 20 rats were used for single myocyte study to measure the intracellular calcium fluorescence and cell shortening, and the remaining (23) were used for single myocyte ionic channel current study.

4. Please carefully proofread your manuscript for typographical errors. For example, “The rats was anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium …” should be the “The rats were anesthetized with pentobarbital sodium …”

Authors: We thank for the editor’s comment and we have carefully proofread the manuscript for typographical and grammatical errors.

5. Please specify in your methods section the method of sacrifice, particularly for the control rats in the in vivo experiment.

Authors: The method for sacrifice of the animals (euthanasia) has been specified in the Method section (Lines 144-146) in this revised version. Animals were sacrificed by cervical dislocation following deep anesthesia with overdose anesthetic (1.25 g/kg urethane by intravenous route).

6. Please ensure that you refer to Figure 6 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

Authors: We apologize that in fact there was no Figure 6 in the manuscript because of the repetitive positing of Figure S1 as Figure 4.

7. Please include a caption for figure 6.

Authors: We apologize that in fact there was no Figure 6 in the manuscript because of the repetitive positing of Figure S1 as Figure 4.

Response to reviewers’ comment

Reviewer #1:

1) There are numerous grammatical mistakes within the text. Consider utilizing a proofreading service to identify and correct the grammar before resubmitting.

Authors: We thank for the editor’s comment and we have carefully proofread the manuscript for typographical and grammatical errors.

2) There are multiple studies that have investigated the cellular mechanisms of paraquat poisoning in the heart of rodent models. In fact, several studies have previously reported deficits to cardiomyocyte contractility and intracellular calcium levels (Dong XS et al. 2014; Zhang L et al. 2018; Wang J et al., 2015). Please provide a more comprehensive elaboration on the previously published findings of paraquat cardiac toxicity and how the findings in your present study are novel, support or differ from what has previously been reported in the introduction and/or discussion sections.

Authors: We agree to the reviewer’s excellent points that we should comprehensively compare the results of the PQ exposure on cardiomyocyte contractility and intracellular calcium handling in our study with those previously reported findings as mentioned by the reviewer. We have improved the discussion and the description has been added to the Discussion section in Lines 435-458 in this revised manuscript.

3) The authors used a dosage of 100-180mg/kg of paraquat for the in vivo studies and a concentration of 1-60 µM paraquat in vitro. Please provide a clear justification for the use of different concentrations in different studies and how they can be compared. Also, how do the chosen concentrations of paraquat relate to human paraquat poisoning cases.

Authors: According to the ingested PQ dose, the severity of PQ poisoning in human are classified as mild, moderate to severe, and massive poisoning. Therefore, we chose different PQ doses to simulate the clinical situations as human poisoning. The explanation for the reason why we used different concentrations in different experiments is depicted in the Method section (Lines 103-116) and Discussion section (Lines 392-404).

In humans, ingestion of dosages larger than 40 mg/kg BW may cause acute fulminant poisoning with extremely high death rate (Vale et al., 1987). In general, the lethal dose in rodents is much higher than that in humans. Therefore, in the present animal study, we chose the dosages several fold to that in humans which may cause massive poisioning to simulate the manifestations in clinical PQ poisoning.

The dosages of 100 and 180 mg/kg PQ in vivo should produce approximate blood concentrations of 5.56 mM and 10 mM, respectively, assume the blood volume is approximate to 7% of the body weight. However, the estimated concentrations cannot directly be applied to the in vitro study unless with proper adjustment. This is because the action of drug is confined in the heart and also the drug can easily access to it target site on the cell in the in vitro conditions. While in the in vivo conditions, the action of drug may be affected by multiple factors such as the pharmacokinetic property, availability of the drug, diffusion barrier, and many other factors. Thus, we used much lower concentrations (eg, 1-60 µM) than the estimated ones for our in vitro study.

4) Did any mice die after receiving the paraquat dose in vivo. It would be important to mention the mortality rate in your in vivo injections and if changes to QTc are associated with earlier/later mortality.

Authors: Many animals in PQ receiving group died at the later stage of the observation period while all animals in vehicle-treated group survived till the end of the experiment. We calculated the mortality rate and found that the mortality rate of 100 mg/kg and 180 mg/kg PQ-treated rats was 60% (6/10) and 90% (9/10), respectively. We also found that the longer QTc interval is correlated with the higher and early mortality rate following PQ treatment. These data were added to the Result section and described in Lines 285-289.

5) It should be discussed why it reduced HR. Is it likely it has an effect on the SA node and funny current or depolarization/repolarization time? Did it cause any SA/AV node block?

Authors: Thanks to the Reviewer’s excellent observation. We noted that paraquat administration decreased heart rate in anesthetized rats. It is known that any decreases in the depolarizing currents such as funny channel current (If), T-type or L-type calcium current, or the repolarizing current such as delayed outward potassium current of the SA node may delay the depolarization or repolarization time, respectively, and contribute to slowing of heart rate. We did not examine these ionic channels in the present study. Further studies are needed to clarify whether PQ could suppress the sinus nodal depolarization or repolarization currents and thereby decreasing the heart rate. This discussion and limitation has been described in the Discussion section (Lines 410-419). As paraquat administration also prolonged the P wave duration and P-R interval, which denote SA nodal-atrial depolarization time and atrial-ventricular (AV nodal) conduction time, respectively, at the later stage of the observation period, it is possible that some mortality of the animals could be due to the severe SA or AV nodal blockade.

6) Why was the standard Bazett correction chosen to normalize the QT interval to heart rate in this study? It is known that QTc is over and underestimated at high and low heart rates, respectively. This overestimation is apparent in data presented in table 1 where the average QTc intervals are essentially the same length as the average RR intervals. A normalized Bazett formula, which normalizes QT to average rat RR interval (Kmecova J et al. 2010, QTcn-B = QT / (RR / f)1/2, f = 150 ms ), has been applied successfully in rodent QT interval correction.

Authors: Thanks for the reviewer’s comment. We referred to the reference mentioned by the reviewer and we agree to the reviewer’s comment that the normalized Bazett’s formula should be more suitable than the conventional one for the correction of QT interval in rodent model. We have recalculated all the QTc values in each group by using the normalized Bazett’s formula and therefore the QTc data in Table 1 were renewed in this revised version.

7) Why was QTc the only ECG wave parameter reported in table 1? Based on the raw ECG traces in Figure 1, there seems to be visible changes occurring to more than QT interval such as changes to the P wave and QRS wave. Increased QRS duration also contributes to QT interval so it would be important to know if there is a change in the QRS complex occurring and would add to the novelty of the data.

Authors: Thanks for the reviewer’s comment. We agree to the reviewer’s comment that the parameters other than QTc interval may also be changed following paraquat administration in vivo. Thus we reanalyzed the ECG data and the parameters of P wave duration and PR and QRS intervals were added to Table 1 in this revised manuscript. Besides, we apologize that we omitted the QT interval data in Table 1 in our previous version. These data were added to Table 1 in this revised manuscript.

8) For the studies depicted in figure 3, the same cells were used for control and paraquat administration. Could the parameters have declined naturally over time? Were any controls run for the same amount of time to determine what the change in calcium or shortening occurred with time and to compare to the difference in paraquat. It is also not entirely clear what statistical analysis was performed on the cardiac myocyte shortening and calcium imaging data; if the same cells are used as the control group then the appropriate statistical analysis would be a repeated measures ANOVA.

Authors: We used the same cells both in the predrug control and drug treatment conditions, therefore, p values in Figure 3C and 3D were conducted by GEE analysis to evaluate the changes of variables over time. This description was added to the Statistic subsection under the Materials and Methods section in Lines 256-258).

9) It is not entirely clear how the statistics were analyzed and what P values were obtained for the data points in Figure 4, panels B-D.

Authors: We are sorry that we misplace the supplementary Fig. S1 as Fig 4 in the previous submission. Therefore, the statistics used in the previous submission was GEE as that for fig. 3C/3D.

Minor comments:

1) line 116,: tyrodes solution component are shown in “µM” however it should be “mM”. Please confirm that all usages of “µM” are correct throughout the text.

Authors: We apologize for the typographical error. All the units including the composition of the solution and calcium and cobalt ions previously labeled with “µM” (Line 116,137, 142, 144, 149, 151, 152, 184, 199, 273 in previous version) were corrected as “mM” throughout the Method and Results sections in the present version.

2) Please indicate incubation times for paraquat within the methods as it is not entirely clear from the results.

Authors: The incubation time of paraquat for all the single myocyte studies was around 4.5 minutes. This description has been added to the Methods section (Lines 210, 248-249).

3) Was not able to find Table S1 linked with the manuscript submission.

Authors: We apologize that Table S1 was not uploaded successfully in our previous submission. We will confirm the uploading in this revised version.

4) Supplemental figure S1 is duplicated as figure 4 in the submission.

Authors: Thank you for reminding us this error. We have deleted the duplicated Figure 4 and made sure all the Figures were accurate.

5) The discussion is repetitive in describing results in some places. For example the same results are described on lines 329-334 as on lines 342-346.

Authors: According the reviewer’s comment, the redundant descriptions (Lines 342-347 in previous version) in Discussion section were deleted.

Reviewer #2:

This study from Chih-Chuan Lin and colleagues aimed to investigate the mechanisms by which the herbicide paraquat (PQ) causes cardiotoxicity. Investigations performed on rats included in vivo analysis of cardiac hemodynamics, ex vivo Langendorff heart perfusions, and measurements of intracellular Ca2+ transients and K+ currents in isolated cardiomyocytes. The investigators found that PQ decreased cardiac contractility and increased QTc interval, decreased the amplitude of Ca2+ transients and suppressed K+ currents. The experiments were carefully executed, although the novel mechanistic insights gained from those experiments are limited to the inhibition of K+ currents. The role of this novel finding in the cardiotoxic effects of PQ should be better integrated in the available literature on the topic.

Authors: First of all, we thank the Reviewer’s comments, giving us the opportunity to revise the manuscript and implement the study with new experiments.

1- In the abstract and the introduction, the authors make the point that the mechanism of acute PQ poisoning induced cardiotoxicity is poorly understood. There are however, several studies which previously reported involvement of inflammation and oxidative stress through pathways involving the proteins TLR4, ETA and FoxO3 (see PMID 23969119, PMID 26089164 and PMID 31264342). Those mechanisms should be mentioned in the text (particularly in the introduction which is no covering the current state of knowledge the way it is presently written). In addition, the discussion should elaborate on how the new mechanistic findings (inhibition of K+ channels by PQ) relate to those previously reported cardiotoxic mechanisms.

Authors: We agree with the Reviewer’s comments that we should cover the known updated studies on the possible underlying mechanism of PQ-induced cardiotoxicity in our manuscript. According the reviewer’s comments, the suggested 3 references were cited and their main findings were described in the Abstract and Introduction sections (Lines 22-24, 66-72). As these 3 references did not provide information about the electrical abnormalities or related mechanisms following PQ administration, while our present study defined the electrical basis for the PQ-induced QTc prolongation. The descriptions were added in the Discussion section to emphasize our novel findings (Lines 437-443, 456-458).

2- Similarly, the authors conclude in their discussion that there is currently no established treatment for PQ poisoning, besides some claims about the potential usefulness of immunosuppressive therapies. There are, however, a few other therapies which have been explored for PQ-induced cardiotoxicity (see for example PMID 31425380 regarding the use of atorvastatin, PMID 31083174 with edaravone, and PMID 19026709 with lysine acetylsalicylate) and these should be cited as well.

Authors: We agree with the Reviewer’s comments that we should cover the other updated therapeutic strategies which have been explored for PQ-induced cardiotoxicity in our manuscript. According the reviewer’s comments, the suggested references were cited and their main findings were described in the Discussion section (Lines 494-504).

3- Although it is somewhat discussed on page 19, could the authors be more specific about the relationship between the PQ doses used for in vivo and ex vivo experiments and the levels reported in cases of human poisoning? In other words, have the doses used for the present experiments been reported in poisoned individuals, thereby reinforcing the clinical relevance of the study?

Authors: The reported LD50 value in rats was around 57 mg/kg. In this study, we used 100 and 180 mg/kg (approximately twice and triple LD50 value, respectively) for the in vivo study. In humans, ingestion of dosages larger than 40 mg/kg BW may cause acute fulminant poisoning with extremely high death rate (Vale et al., 1987). In general, the lethal dose in rodents is much higher than that in humans. Therefore, in the present animal study, we chose the dosages several fold to that in humans which may cause massive poisioning to simulate the manifestations in clinical PQ poisoning.

For the in vitro study, the concentrations used were estimated according to the calculated blood concentrations of PQ (Mw 257.16), assume that the blood volume (mL) is estimated to be 7% of the body weight (g). Consequently, dosages of 100 and 180 mg/kg PQ may produce approximate blood concentrations of 5.56 mM and 10 mM, respectively. However, the estimated concentrations cannot directly be applied to the in vitro study unless with proper adjustment. This is because the action of drug is confined in the heart and also the drug can easily access to it target site on the cell in the in vitro conditions. In contrast, in the in vivo conditions, the action of drug may be affected by multiple factors such as the pharmacokinetic property, availability of the drug, diffusion barrier, and many other factors. Thus, we used much lower concentrations (eg, 1-60 µM) than the estimated ones for our in vitro study. Although the intoxication dosages in rats are much higher than those in humans, our study showed that the dose-dependent cardiac suppressive effects of PQ are comparable to the clinical conditions in PQ poisoning cases. The descriptions were added to the Method section (Lines 103-116) and Discussion section (Lines 392-404).

4- Figure 1: A “Control 3h” should also be presented on that figure.

Authors: According to the reviewer’s comments, the representative tracings of the saline vehicle and time control group of in vivo study were prepared and provided as Supplemental Figure S1.

5- Figure 4 (labeled by mistake as Figure 5 in manuscript): The y axes from the graphs presenting the current traces in panel A should include more values to have a better idea of the amplitudes in each condition depicted. Panels B, C, D, E: Any significant differences between curves and points should be indicated on the graphs.

Authors: According to the reviewer’s comments, more values for labeling of the y axis in panel A of Figure 4 were added to improve the presentation quality. In panel B-D, no labeling to denote the significant differences are shown because there were trend of changes between curves and points following paraquat treatment but the differences did not reach statistical significance.

Minor comments:

1- Line 74: Per journal requirements, the ethics statement on animal research should also indicate that “all efforts were made to minimize animal suffering”.

Authors: The ethics statement “all efforts were made to minimize animal suffering” was added in Line 95 in the Material and Methods section.

2- Line 236: Table 1 is referred to as Table S1

Authors: We are sure that Table S1 here is the correct one as this Table denotes the predrug basline values of the hemodynamic and ECG data.

3- Line 268: “PQ” is missing from that sentence.

Authors: We thank for the reviewer’s observation. In deed, “PQ” is missing from the sentence. As the comment of the results was also depicted in the Discussion section, this sentence was therefore deleted in this revised manuscript.

4- Figure S1 also appears in the manuscript as Figure 4, therefore the labeling of figures starting with figure 4 is not accurate in the text.

Authors: We apologize for the error of positing Figure S1 as Figure 4. We rechecked all the figures and made sure the labeling were correct throughout the text in the revised version.

5- Lines 303-307: This information should be reported in the Methods section only.

Authors: Thank for the reviewer’s suggestion and this description was moved to the Material and Methods section (Lines 240-243) in this revised version.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.doc

Decision Letter 1

Richard T Clements

19 Mar 2021

Hemodynamic and electromechanical effects of paraquat in rat heart

PONE-D-20-15928R1

Dear Dr. Chang,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Richard T. Clements, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Please also make the grammatical revisions requested by reviewer 2. 

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All my concerns have been addressed adequately. Please proofread the manuscript carefully one more time as typographical errors are still found throughout the text, and especially in the introduction. For example:

- Sentence at lines 54-55 is not clear

- Line 56: "mostly or one week"? This part of the sentence is not clear

- Line 56: "injured"

- Line 61: "may lead to triggered activity" . This part of sentence is not clear

- Line 111: "assuming that blood volume (in mL) represents 7% of the body weight (in g)."

- Line 171: "at a rate of 6 mL/min/g cardiac tissue"

- Line 215: "A small aliquot of dissociated cells was placed..."

- Line 440: Review this sentence which is no clear and provide meaning of ETA abbreviation (endothelin receptor type A) in sentence.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Richard T Clements

25 Mar 2021

PONE-D-20-15928R1

Hemodynamic and electromechanical effects of paraquat in rat heart

Dear Dr. Chang:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Richard T. Clements

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Representative recordings of arterial pressure, LV pressure (LVP), first derivative of LV pressure (LV dP/dt), and ECG from an anesthetized rat at baseline and at various times after treatment with normal saline (1 mL/kg, i.v.).

    (DOCX)

    S2 Fig. Effects of saline vehicle (0.03%) on LV pressure (LVP) in isolated hearts paced at 300 beats/min.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Fig. Effects of paraquat on kinetic parameters of cell shortening and intracellular Ca2+ transients in rat ventricular myocytes.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Fig. Effects of saline vehicle on Ca2+ transients (represented by fura-2 fluorescence ratio F340/F380) and cell shortening in rat ventricular myocytes paced at 1 Hz.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table. Baseline hemodynamic and electrocardiographic parameters in anesthetized rats receiving the vehicle or PQ at a dose of 100 or 180 mg/kg.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.doc

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES