Figure 1B shows the dose–response data for ADP, UTP, and ATP. The dose–response data for UTP was modeled as a first-order reaction with a 50% effective concentration (EC
50) at 42.8 ± 1.1 μM, and a Hill coefficient (n
H) of 13.0 ± 2.8. However, the dose–response curves of ADP and ATP did not show any inflection point within the concentration range used (1–300 μM). Therefore, no reliable fit to these data could be made with the Michaelis-Menten equation. These results suggest that first, the ADP- and ATP-evoked [Ca
2+]
i increases may be mediated, at least in part, by a receptor subtype other than the purinergic receptor underlying the response to UTP, and second, overestimation of the EC
50 and n
H for these agonists is indicative of hydrolysis of ADP, UTP, and ATP by extracellular enzymes.
24 Therefore, we investigated the responses elicited by nine additional ligands, some of which are considered non- or less-hydrolyzable.
25 The data in
Figure 1C compares the relative [Ca
2+]
i increases recorded in response to these 12 agonists. All agonists were applied at a 30-μM concentration, except αβmeATP, which was tested at 100 μM. These agonists included those considered specific for the P2Y
1 subtype (ADPβS, 2-meSADP, 2-meSATP, and ADP), the P2Y
2 subtype (UTP and ATP), the P2Y
4 subtype (UTP), the P2Y
6 subtype (UDP), and the P2Y
11 subtype (ATPγS).
26 27 Agonists specific for ionotropic P2X receptors (αβmeADP and αβmeATP), and the P2X
7-specific agonist bzATP
28 were also tested.