4.7 Article

Liver and skeletal muscle mitochondria proteomes are altered in pigs divergently selected for residual feed intake

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
卷 92, 期 5, 页码 1995-2007

出版社

AMER SOC ANIMAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.2527/jas.2013-7391

关键词

two-dimensional difference in gel electrophoresis; metabolism; mitochondria; residual feed intake

资金

  1. Agriculture and Food Research Initiative competitive grant of the United States Department of Agriculture's National Institute of Food and Agriculture [2010-65206-20670]
  2. NIFA [580940, 2010-65206-20670] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Animals selected for residual feed intake (RFI) can be used as a model to elucidate molecular explanations for differences in growth efficiency. The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which the protein profile and posttranslational modifications of mitochondria from skeletal muscle and liver relate to feed efficiency gains in pigs divergently selected for RFI. Mitochondria were isolated from the longissimus dorsi (LD) muscle and the liver from pigs (n = 9 each for the high and low RFI line; BW = 95.8 kg). Mitochondria protein profile differences were determined using two-dimensional difference in gel electrophoresis. Proteins were identified using electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. In the line comparison, the beta subunit of ATP synthase, heat shock protein (HSP) 60, and HSP70, were identified as being increased in mitochondria from the liver of the low RFI line (23 to 50%; P < 0.1). These differences were not observed in the other comparisons. In the LD, proteins identified as being different between RFI phenotypes included HSP70 and subunit 1 of the cytochrome bc1 complex. These data indicate that genetic selection for RFI tends to result in a consistent change in mitochondrial protein profile. In contrast, classification by phenotype demonstrates that phenotypic differences in RFI are not specifically associated with alterations of the mitochondria protein profile.

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

4.7
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