4.3 Article

Comparative proteomics reveals protective effect of resveratrol on a high-fat diet-induced damage to mice testis

Journal

SYSTEMS BIOLOGY IN REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 66, Issue 1, Pages 37-49

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/19396368.2019.1701138

Keywords

Proteomics; resveratrol; testis; obesity

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (Beijing) [81471504]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, resveratrol has been shown to protect against metabolic damage, including obesity-associated subfertility/infertility. In the present study, proteomic alterations in testicular tissues were investigated by tandem mass tag (TMT) in mice fed with a high-fat diet (HFD) without or with resveratrol supplementation (HFD+RSV). Serum testosterone levels, spermatozoa parameters and testicular histological morphology were assessed. Resveratrol treatment was shown to significantly reduce serum cholesterol, prevent the HFD-induced reductions in serum testosterone and spermatozoa parameters, and decrease the ultrastructural degeneration of testicular tissues. The comparative proteomics analysis revealed 58 differentially expressed proteins between the HFD and control groups and 38 differentially expressed proteins between the HFD and HFD+RSV groups. Gene ontology (GO) term enrichment and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis revealed that the most highly enriched differential proteins were correlated to spermatozoa function and cholesterol metabolism. The real-time RT-PCR and western blotting results confirmed the differential expression of the corresponding proteins related to spermatozoa function that were identified by proteomics. The present study provides new insight into the mechanisms of the beneficial effects of resveratrol, and may present it as a potential therapeutic strategy for obesity-associated male subfertility/infertility.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available