4.7 Article

The Effects of Muscle Cell Aging on Myogenesis

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22073721

关键词

myoblasts; myogenesis; cellular senescence; aging; sarcopenia; muscle atrophy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of senescence/aging on skeletal myogenesis through in vitro experiments. Aged myoblasts showed cell cycle arrest, DNA damage, increased SA-beta-gal activity, and altered expression of various factors compared to control cells during differentiation. The findings suggest that aging disrupts myogenic lineage and leads to a reduction in differentiation capacity.
The process of myogenesis gradually deteriorates as the skeletal muscle ages, contributing to muscle mass loss. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of senescence/aging on skeletal myogenesis, in vitro. A model of multiple cell divisions of C2C12 myoblasts was used to replicate cell senescence. Control and aged myoblasts were investigated during myogenesis, i.e., at days 0, 2, and 6of differentiation. SA-beta-gal activity and comet assay were used as markers of aging and DNA damage. Flow cytometry was performed to characterize potential differences in cell cycle between control and aged cells. Alterations in the mRNA and/or protein expression of myogenic regulatory factors (MRFs), IGF-1 isoforms, apoptotic, atrophy, inflammatory, metabolic and aging-related factors were evaluated. Compared with the control cells, aged myoblasts exhibited G0/G1 cell cycle arrest, DNA damage, increased SA-beta-gal activity, and increased expression of aging-related factors p16 and p21 during differentiation. Moreover, aged myoblasts showed a reduction in the expression of MRFs and metabolic/anabolic factors, along with an increased expression of apoptotic, atrophy and inflammatory factors. A diminished differentiation capacity characterized the aged myoblasts which, in combination with the induction of apoptotic and atrophy factors, indicated a disrupted myogenic lineage in the senescent muscle cells.

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