4.6 Article

Gene expression changes in response to aging compared to heat stress, oxidative stress and ionizing radiation in Drosophila melanogaster

Journal

AGING-US
Volume 4, Issue 11, Pages 768-789

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.100499

Keywords

Oxidative stress; ROS; mitochondria; GST; Nrf2

Funding

  1. Department of Health and Human Services [AG011833]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gene expression changes in response to aging, heat stress, hyperoxia, hydrogen peroxide, and ionizing radiation were compared using microarrays. A set of 18 genes were up-regulated across all conditions, indicating a general stress response shared with aging, including the heat shock protein (Hsp) genes Hsp70, Hsp83 and l(2)efl, the glutathione-S-transferase gene GstD2, and the mitochondrial unfolded protein response (mUPR) gene ref(2)P. Selected gene expression changes were confirmed using quantitative PCR, Northern analysis and GstD-GFP reporter constructs. Certain genes were altered in only a subset of the conditions, for example, up-regulation of numerous developmental pathway and signaling genes in response to hydrogen peroxide. While aging shared features with each stress, aging was more similar to the stresses most associated with oxidative stress (hyperoxia, hydrogen peroxide, ionizing radiation) than to heat stress. Aging is associated with down-regulation of numerous mitochondrial genes, including electron-transport-chain (ETC) genes and mitochondrial metabolism genes, and a sub-set of these changes was also observed upon hydrogen peroxide stress and ionizing radiation stress. Aging shared the largest number of gene expression changes with hyperoxia. The extensive down-regulation of mitochondrial and ETC genes during aging is consistent with an aging-associated failure in mitochondrial maintenance, which may underlie the oxidative stress-like and proteotoxic stress-like responses observed during aging.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available