4.6 Article

Differences in expression of retinal proteins between diabetic and normal rats

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 13, Issue 14, Pages 2118-2124

Publisher

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i14.2118

Keywords

diabetes; rat; retina; proteomics; two-dimensional electrophoresis; tandem mass spectrometry; bioinformatics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AIM: To compare and identify the differences in expression of retinal proteins between normal and diabetic rats, and to analyze the molecular pathogenetic mechanisms of retinal diseases caused by diabetes. METHODS: Changes in protein expression of retinal tissues from diabetic and normal rats were observed using 2-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (2-DE). Some protein spots exhibiting statistically significant variations (P < 0.05) were selected randomly and identified by tandem mass spectrometry and analyzed by bioinformatics. RESULTS: 2-DE showed that the expression was upregulated in 5 retinal proteins, down-regulated in 23 retinal proteins, and disappeared in 8 retinal proteins. Eight spots were identified from the 36 spots by tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) and analyzed by bioinformatics. Guanylate kinase 1, triosephosphate isomerase 1, ATP synthase subunit cl, albumin and dimethylarginine dimethylaminohydrolase 2 played an important role in signal transduction. Triosephosphate isomerase 1, crystallin alpha B, ATP synthase subunit d and peroxiredoxin 6 were involved in energy metabolism of retinal tissues. Guanylate kinase 1 played an important role in photoexcitation of retinal rod photoreceptor cells. Whether crystallin beta A1 plays a role in diabetic retinas is unknown so far. CONCLUSION: There are differences in expression of retinal proteins between diabetic and normal rats. These proteins may be involved in the mechanisms and prognosis of retinal diseases caused by diabetes. (c) 2007 The WJG Press. 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available