Pharmacological profiling of store-operated Ca(2+) entry in retinal arteriolar smooth muscle

Objective: Pharmacological profiling of store-operated Ca(2+) entry (SOCE) and molecular profiling of ORAI and TRPC expression in arterioles. 
Methods: Fura-2 based microfluorimetry was used to assess CPA-induced SOCE in rat retinal arteriolar myocytes. Arteriolar ORAI and TRP transcript expression were screened using RT-PCR. 
Results: SKF96365 and LOE908 blocked SOCE (IC(50) s of 1.2µM and 1.4µM, respectively). Gd(3+) and La(3+) potently inhibited SOCE (IC(50) s of 21nM and 42nM, respectively), but Ni(2+) showed lower potency (IC(50) = 11.6µM). 2-aminoethyldiphenyl borate (2APB) inhibited SOCE (IC(50) = 3.7µM) but enhanced basal influx (>100µM). Verapamil and nifedipine had no effect at concentrations that inhibit L-type Ca(2+) channels, but diltiazem inhibited SOCE by approximately 40% (=0.1µM). RT-PCR demonstrated transcript expression for ORAI 1, 2 and 3, and TRPC1, 3, 4 and 7. Transcripts for TRPV1 and 2, which are activated by 2APB, were also expressed. 
Conclusion: The pharmacological profile of SOCE in retinal arteriolar smooth muscle appears unique when compared to other vascular tissues. This suggests that the molecular mechanisms underlying SOCE can differ, even in closely related tissues. Taken together, the pharmacological and molecular data are most consistent with involvement of TRPC1 in SOCE, although involvement of ORAI or other TRPC channels cannot be excluded. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The 1863 Melbourne Shakespeare War: Barry Sullivan, Charles and Ellen Kean, and the Play of Cultural Usurpation on the Australian Stage

This essay investigates an intricate drama of cultural identity in performances of Shakespeare on the nineteenth-century Melbourne stage. It considers the rivalry between Charles and Ellen Kean and their competitor, Barry Sullivan, for the two-month period in 1863 during which their Australian tours overlapped. This Melbourne Shakespeare war was anticipated,augmented, and richly documented in Melbourne’s papers: The Age, The Argus and Melbourne Punch. This essay pursues two seams of inquiry. The first is an investigation of the discourses of cultural and aesthetic value laced through the language of reviews of their Shakespearean roles.The essay identifies how reviewers register affective engagement with the performers in these roles, and suggests how the roles themselves reflected, by accident or design, the terms of the dispute. The second is concerned with the national identity of the actors. Kean, although born in Waterford, Ireland, had held the post of Queen Victoria’s Master of the Revels and identified himself as English. Sullivan, although born in Birmingham, was of Cork parentage and was identified as Irish by both his supporters and his detractors. This essay tracks the development of the actors’ national and artistic identities established prior to Melbourne and ask how they played out on in the context of the particularities of Australian reception. It shows that, in this instance, these actors were implicated in complex debates over national authority and cultural ownership.