4.5 Article

Comparative analysis of microarray data identifies common responses to caloric restriction among mouse tissues

Journal

MECHANISMS OF AGEING AND DEVELOPMENT
Volume 129, Issue 3, Pages 138-153

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mad.2007.11.003

Keywords

aging; diet restriction; gene expression; longevity; microarray

Funding

  1. Intramural NIH HHS [Z01 AG000114] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [T32 AG000114-24, T32 AG000114] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Caloric restriction has been extensively investigated as an intervention that both extends lifespan and delays age-related disease in mammals. In mice, much interest has centered on evaluating gene expression changes induced by caloric restriction (CR) in particular tissue types, but the overall systemic effect of CR among multiple tissues has been examined less extensively. This study presents a comparative analysis of microarray datasets that have collectively examined the effects of CR in 10 different tissue types (liver, heart, muscle, hypothalamus, hippocampus, white adipose tissue, colon, kidney, lung and cochlea). Using novel methods for comparative analysis of microarray data, detailed comparisons of the effects of CR among tissues are provided, and 28 genes for which expression response to CR is most shared among tissues are identified. These genes characterize common responses to CR, which consist of both activation and inhibition of stress-response pathways. With respect to liver tissue, transcriptional effects of CR exhibited surprisingly little overlap with those of aging, and a variable degree of overlap with the potential CR-mimetic drug resveratrol. These analyses shed light on the systemic transcriptional activity associated with CR diets, and also illustrate new approaches for comparative analysis of microarray datasets in the context of aging biology. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available