4.6 Article

β-Cell deletion of Nr4a1 and Nr4a3 nuclear receptors impedes mitochondrial respiration and insulin secretion

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpendo.00022.2016

关键词

pancreatic beta-cell; proliferation; Nr4a1; Nr4a3; mitochondria; respiration; insulin secretion

资金

  1. Brigham Young University Mentoring Environment Grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

beta-Cell insulin secretion is dependent on proper mitochondrial function. Various studies have clearly shown that the Nr4a family of orphan nuclear receptors is essential for fuel utilization and mitochondrial function in liver, muscle, and adipose. Previously, we have demonstrated that overexpression of Nr4a1 or Nr4a3 is sufficient to induce proliferation of pancreatic beta-cells. In this study, we examined whether Nr4a expression impacts pancreatic beta-cell mitochondrial function. Here, we show that beta-cell mitochondrial respiration is dependent on the nuclear receptors Nr4a1 and Nr4a3. Mitochondrial respiration in permeabilized cells was significantly decreased in beta-cells lacking Nr4a1 or Nr4a3. Furthermore, respiration rates of intact cells deficient for Nr4a1 or Nr4a3 in the presence of 16 mM glucose resulted in decreased glucose mediated oxygen consumption. Consistent with this reduction in respiration, a significant decrease in glucose-stimulated insulin secretion rates is observed with deletion of Nr4a1 or Nr4a3. Interestingly, the changes in respiration and insulin secretion occur without a reduction in mitochondrial content, suggesting decreased mitochondrial function. We establish that knockdown of Nr4a1 and Nr4a3 results in decreased expression of the mitochondrial dehydrogenase subunits Idh3g and Sdhb. We demonstrate that loss of Nr4a1 and Nr4a3 impedes production of ATP and ultimately inhibits glucose-stimulated insulin secretion. These data demonstrate for the first time that the orphan nuclear receptors Nr4a1 and Nr4a3 are critical for beta-cell mitochondrial function and insulin secretion.

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