4.7 Article

The Effect of Long Term Calorie Restriction on in Vivo Hepatic Proteostatis: A Novel Combination of Dynamic and Quantitative Proteomics

期刊

MOLECULAR & CELLULAR PROTEOMICS
卷 11, 期 12, 页码 1801-1814

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/mcp.M112.021204

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Calorie restriction (CR) promotes longevity. A prevalent mechanistic hypothesis explaining this effect suggests that protein degradation, including mitochondrial autophagy, is increased with CR, removing damaged proteins and improving cellular fitness. At steady state, increased catabolism must be balanced by increasing mitochondrial biogenesis and protein synthesis, resulting in faster protein replacement rates. To test this hypothesis, we measured replacement kinetics and relative concentrations of hundreds of proteins in vivo in long-term CR and ad libitum-fed mice using metabolic (H2O)-H-2-labeling combined with the Stable Isotope Labeling in Mammals protocol and LC-MS/MS analysis of mass isotopomer abundances in tryptic peptides. CR reduced absolute synthesis and breakdown rates of almost all measured hepatic proteins and prolonged the half-lives of most (similar to 80%), particularly mitochondrial proteins (but not ribosomal subunits). Proteins with related functions exhibited coordinated changes in relative concentration and replacement rates. In silico expression pathway interrogation allowed the testing of potential regulators of altered network dynamics (e.g. peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma coactivator 1-alpha). In summary, our combination of dynamic and quantitative proteomics suggests that long-term CR reduces mitochondrial biogenesis and mitophagy. Our findings contradict the theory that CR increases mitochondrial protein turnover and provide compelling evidence that cellular fitness is accompanied by reduced global protein synthetic burden. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 11: 10.1074/mcp.M112.021204, 1801-1814, 2012.

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