4.8 Article

Comparative analyses of time-course gene expression profiles of the long-lived sch9 delta mutant

Journal

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
Volume 38, Issue 1, Pages 143-158

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkp849

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIA NIH HHS [R01 AG020642] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [R01AG020642] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In an attempt to elucidate the underlying longevity-promoting mechanisms of mutants lacking SCH9, which live three times as long as wild type chronologically, we measured their time-course gene expression profiles. We interpreted their expression time differences by statistical inferences based on prior biological knowledge, and identified the following significant changes: (i) between 12 and 24 h, stress response genes were up-regulated by larger fold changes and ribosomal RNA (rRNA) processing genes were down-regulated more dramatically; (ii) mitochondrial ribosomal protein genes were not up-regulated between 12 and 60 h as wild type were; (iii) electron transport, oxidative phosphorylation and TCA genes were down-regulated early; (iv) the up-regulation of TCA and electron transport was accompanied by deep down-regulation of rRNA processing over time; and (v) rRNA processing genes were more volatile over time, and three associated cis-regulatory elements [rRNA processing element (rRPE), polymerase A and C (PAC) and glucose response element (GRE)] were identified. Deletion of AZF1, which encodes the transcriptional factor that binds to the GRE element, reversed the lifespan extension of sch9 delta. The significant alterations in these time-dependent expression profiles imply that the lack of SCH9 turns on the longevity programme that extends the lifespan through changes in metabolic pathways and protection mechanisms, particularly, the regulation of aerobic respiration and rRNA processing.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available