The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Transport of glycyl-L-proline into intestinal and renal brush border vesicles from rabbit.
Open accessAbstract
Transport of labeled glycyl-L-proline has been shown to occur with highly purified brush border membrane vesicles from the epithelial cells of rabbit small intestine and renal cortex. With 1-min incubation, transport occurs mainly as the intact dipeptide since less than 10% of the dipeptide in the medium is hydrolyzed within the period. The properties of the dipeptide transport system are similar in both small intestinal and renal brush border membrane vesicles. The steady state transport varies inversely with medium osmolarity. Extrapolation to infinite medium osmolarity indicates that transport occurs predominantly into an osmotically reactive intravesicular space rather than binding to the membranes. The affinity constants (Kt) for glycyl-L-proline transport in small intestinal and renal brush border membrane vesicles are comparable (0.9 mM in intestine and 1.1 mM in kidney). Under conditions in which presence of a Na+ gradient between external and intravesicular media stimulated L-alanine transport, glycyl-L-proline transport remains unaffected. Other dipeptides strongly inhibit the transport of glycyl-L-proline but amino acids have no effect. The selective inhibition of glycyl-L-proline transport by other dipeptides is observed in the presence as well as in the absence of a Na+ gradient. Harmaline inhibits Na+-stimulated L-alanine transport but it has no effect on glycyl-L-proline transport even in the presence of Na+. In these respects, dipeptide transport seems to differ from amino acid transport. It is proposed that the Na+ gradient hypothesis of sugar and amino acid transport is not applicable for dipeptide transport. These data provide additional evidence for the distinct nature of amino acid and dipeptide transport systems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Kobayashi, Y., Suzuki, M., Satsu, H., Arai, S., Hara, Y., Suzuki, K., Miyamoto, Y., & Shimizu, M. (2000) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf0006832 · Cited by 386
Hagting, A., Kunji, E. R., Leenhouts, K. J., Poolman, B., & Konings, W. N. (1994) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1016/s0021-9258(19)78137-x · Cited by 119
Huang, W., Shaikh, S. N., Ganapathy, M. E., Hopfer, U., Leibach, F. H., Carter, A. L., & Ganapathy, V. (1999) · Biochemical Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/s0006-2952(99)00219-1 · Cited by 22
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ganapathy, V., Mendicino, J. F., & Leibach, F. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Biological Chemistry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1981-01
- Volume
- 256
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 118-124
- ISSN
- 0021-9258 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1487399381
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transport of glycyl-L-proline into intestinal and renal brush border vesicles from rabbit. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0021-9258(19)70106-9
- The paper
- Ganapathy, V., Mendicino, J. F., & Leibach, F. H. (1981). Transport of glycyl-L-proline into intestinal and renal brush border vesicles from rabbit. Journal of Biological Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-9258(19)70106-9
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.