4.7 Article

Expression Silencing of Glutathione Peroxidase 4 in Mouse Erythroleukemia Cells Delays In Vitro Erythropoiesis

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22157795

关键词

cell differentiation; lipid peroxidation; oxidative stress; eicosanoids

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Ku 961/13-1, Ku 961/14-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

GPX4, as the only enzyme capable of reducing complex lipid peroxides to the corresponding alcohols, plays a role in erythroid differentiation of mouse erythroleukemia cells, but heterozygous expression of a catalytically inactive Gpx4 is not sufficient to compromise erythropoiesis in vivo and ex vivo.
Among the eight human glutathione peroxidase isoforms, glutathione peroxidase 4 (GPX4) is the only enzyme capable of reducing complex lipid peroxides to the corresponding alcohols. In mice, corruption of the Gpx4 gene leads to embryonic lethality and more detailed expression silencing studies have implicated the enzyme in several physiological processes (e.g., embryonal cerebrogenesis, neuronal function, male fertility). Experiments with conditional knockout mice, in which expression of the Gpx4 gene was silenced in erythroid precursors, indicated a role of Gpx4 in erythropoiesis. To test this hypothesis in a cellular in vitro model we transfected mouse erythroleukemia cells with a Gpx4 siRNA construct and followed the expression kinetics of erythropoietic gene products. Our data indicate that Gpx4 is expressed at high levels in mouse erythroleukemia cells and that expression silencing of the Gpx4 gene delays in vitro erythropoiesis. However, heterozygous expression of a catalytically inactive Gpx4 mutant (Gpx4(+/Sec46Ala)) did not induce a defective erythropoietic phenotype in different in vivo and ex vivo models. These data suggest that Gpx4 plays a role in erythroid differentiation of mouse erythroleukemia cells but that heterozygous expression of a catalytically inactive Gpx4 is not sufficient to compromise in vivo and ex vivo erythropoiesis.

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