4.5 Article

Real-time reverse transcription-PCR expression profiling of porcine troponin I family in three different types of muscles during development

Journal

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY REPORTS
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages 827-832

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11033-010-0172-5

Keywords

Troponin I; Expression profiling; Pig; Longissimus Dorsi muscle; Semitendinosus muscle; Cardiac muscle

Funding

  1. Agricultural Innovation Fund of Hubei Province
  2. National High Technology Development Project (863 project)
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of P. R. China [30500358]
  4. National Key Technology RD Program [2008BADB2B02]
  5. Education Ministry of China [IRT0831]
  6. 973 Program of P. R. China [2006CB102102]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the expression profiling of three troponin I isoforms (TNNI1, TNNI2 and TNNI3) was investigated in two pig breeds differing in muscularity (Yorkshire and Meishan) at six stages (fetal 60 days and postnatal 3, 35, 60, 120, and 180 days) and three types of muscles (longissimus dorsi muscle, LD; semitendinosus, ST; cardiac muscle, CM) using relative real-time quantitative PCR. Significant differences of troponin I expression in three muscles were found between Yorkshire and Meishan breeds at some stages. The expression peak of TNNI1 and TNNI2 in LD and ST was at postnatal 35 or 60 days in Yorkshire and at postnatal 120 or 180 days in Meishan pigs, while it occurred in CM at postnatal 3 days in two pig breeds. The relative expression values of TNNI1 and TNNI2 were significantly higher in LD than ST at most of stages after birth. The expression ratio of TNNI2 versus TNNI1 favoured TNNI2 expression in ST and LD, but on the contrary in CM. The expression peak of TNNI3 occurred at postnatal 60 and 120 days in Yorkshire and Meishan pigs, respectively. TNNI1 and TNNI3 were co-expressed in CM during the fetal and earlier stages after birth.

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