4.6 Article

Identification and evolution of two insulin receptor genes involved in Tribolium castaneum development and reproduction

期刊

GENE
卷 585, 期 2, 页码 196-204

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gene.2016.02.034

关键词

Insulin receptor; Evolution; RNA interference; Development; Reproduction; Tribolium castaneum

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31172146, 31572326]
  2. PAPD of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions
  3. Graduate Innovation Research Projects of Jiangsu Colleges and Universities [CXZZ11_0884]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The insulin and insulin-like signaling (IIS) pathway exists in a wide range of organisms from mammals to invertebrates and regulates several vital physiological functions. A phylogenetic analysis have indicated that insulin receptors have been duplicated at least twice among vertebrates, whereas only one duplication occurred in insects before the differentiation of Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, and Hemiptera. Thus, we cloned two putative insulin receptor genes, Tcas-ir1 and T.cas-ir2, from T. castaneum and determined that Tcas-ir1 is most strongly expressed during the late adult and early pupal stages, whereas T.cas-ir2 is most strongly expressed during the late larval stage. We found that larval RNAi against T.cas-ir1 and Tcas-ir2 causes 100% and 42.0% insect death, respectively, and that parental RNAi against T.cas-ir1 and T.cas-ir2 leads to 100% and 33.3% reductions in beetle fecundity, respectively. The hatching rate of ds-ir2 insects was 66.2%. Moreover, ANAL against these two genes increased the expression of the pkc, foxo, jnk, cdc42, ikk, and mekk genes but decreased erk gene expression. Despite these similarities, these two genes act via distinct regulatory pathways. These results indicate that these two receptors have functionally diverged with respect to the development and reproduction of T. castaneum, even though they retain some common regulatory signaling pathways. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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