4.6 Article

Conserved aging-related signatures of senescence and inflammation in different tissues and species

期刊

AGING-US
卷 11, 期 19, 页码 8556-8572

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.102345

关键词

aging; inflammaging; senescence; RNA-Seq; transcriptomics

资金

  1. Carl Zeiss Stiftung
  2. Ministry for Economics, Sciences and Digital Society of Thuringia (TMWWDG) [RegenerAging-52-5581-413-FSU-I03/14]
  3. DFG [Wi 830/11-2, Wi830/12-1]
  4. EU BrainAge [FP7/279281]
  5. MBF JenAge

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing evidence indicates that chronic inflammation and senescence are the cause of many severe age-related diseases, with both biological processes highly upregulated during aging. However, until now, it has remained unknown whether specific inflammation- or senescence-related genes exist that are common between different species or tissues. These potential markers of aging could help to identify possible targets for therapeutic interventions of aging-associated afflictions and might also deepen our understanding of the principal mechanisms of aging. With the objective of identifying such signatures of aging and tissue-specific aging markers, we analyzed a multitude of cross-sectional RNA-Seq data from four evolutionarily distinct species (human, mouse and two fish) and four different tissues (blood, brain, liver and skin). In at least three different species and three different tissues, we identified several genes that displayed similar expression patterns that might serve as potential aging markers. Additionally, we show that genes involved in aging-related processes tend to be tighter controlled in long-lived than in average-lived individuals. These observations hint at a general genetic level that affect an individual's life span. Altogether, this descriptive study contributes to a better understanding of common aging signatures as well as tissue-specific aging patterns and supplies the basis for further investigative age-related studies.

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