4.7 Article

Transcriptomic and Metabonomic Profiling of Obesity-Prone and Obesity-Resistant Rats under High Fat Diet

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOME RESEARCH
卷 7, 期 11, 页码 4775-4783

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/pr800352k

关键词

insulin resistance; microarray; metabolic disorders; free fatty acid; high fat diet

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2007CB914700]
  2. International Collaborative Project, Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology [2006DFA02700]
  3. Development Projects of Shanghai Commission of Science and Technology [06DZI9727]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rodents respond to chronic high fat diet in at least two ways: some of them may readily gain body weight and become obese (termed obesity-prone, OP), and others may not (termed obesity-resistant, OR). Transcriptomic and metabonomic profiling of OP and OR rats has been conducted, showing two sets of significantly different phenotypic profiles in response to 16 weeks of high fat diet. We observed significant differences in transcriptional expression of nearly 80 genes, some of which are known to be involved in lipid metabolism, transport, and ketone body production. The different metabolic profiles in liver tissue extracts, serum, and urine between the two phenotypes can be ascribed to the corresponding pathways identified with multivariate statistical analysis, including fatty acid metabolism, Krebs cycle, and amino acid metabolism. The integration of results from transcriptomic and metabonomic studies revealed that the altered metabolic pathways in OP rats may involve the increased activity of sympathetic nervous system and Krebs cycle, an increased production of ketone bodies, and an adaptive regulatory process to store excessive lipids in liver through reverse cholesterol transport process. These biochemical variations at transcriptional and metabolic levels as a result of dietary intervention highlight the significance of combined omics strategy in the mechanistic study of obesity and metabolic disorders.

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