4.6 Article

Conserved microRNAs miR-8-5p and miR-2a-3p modulate chitin biosynthesis in response to 20-hydroxyecdysone signaling in the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens

期刊

INSECT BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 43, 期 9, 页码 839-848

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2013.06.002

关键词

miR-8-5p; miR-2a-3p; Chitin biosynthesis pathway; Broad-Complex (BR-C); 20E

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2010CB126200]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31171900]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molting is an important developmental process in insects, usually along with synthesis and degradation of chitin. 20-hydroxyecdysone (20E), an insect hormone, has been reported to contribute to many processes including molting. However, little is known about the link between the chitin biosynthesis pathway and 20E signaling. Here, we report that conserved miR-8-5p (miR-8-5p) and miR-2a-3p and their new target genes are critical for ecdysone-induced chitin biosynthesis in a hemipteran insect Nilaparvata lugens. We found that membrane-bound trehalase (Tre-2) and phosphoacetylglucosamine mutase (PAGM) in the chitin biosynthesis pathway were targets of miR-8-5p and miR-2a-3p, respectively, through bioinformatic analysis and experimental verification. The levels of miR-8-5p and miR-2a-3p were reduced, whereas the levels of Tre-2 and PAGM were up-regulated in response to 20E. In addition, miR-8-5p and miR-2a-3p were transcriptionally repressed by an early-response gene, the Broad-Complex (BR-C), in the 20E signaling pathway. Moreover, the over-expression of miR-8-5p and miR-2a-3p led to a significant reduction in the survival rate along with a molting obstacles defect phenotype caused by miR-2a-3p mimics feeding, and the chitin content of N. lugens was simultaneously reduced. Thus, miR-8-5p and miR-2a-3p act as molecular link that tune the chitin biosynthesis pathway in response to 20E signaling. (c) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据