4.6 Article

The C. elegans truncated insulin receptor DAF-2B regulates survival of L1 arrested larvae

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 18, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288764

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We previously characterized a truncated isoform of the C. elegans insulin-like receptor, DAF-2B, which modifies insulin / insulin-like growth factor signaling-dependent processes and sequesters insulin-like peptides. In this study, we show that DAF-2B is also important for starvation resistance and enhances survival in starved first stage larvae. The expression of DAF-2B from the hypodermis promotes survival under starvation conditions.
We have previously characterized a truncated isoform of the C. elegans insulin-like receptor, DAF-2B, which retains the ligand binding domain but cannot transduce a signal due to the absence of the intracellular signaling domain. DAF-2B modifies insulin / insulin-like growth factor signaling-dependent processes, such as dauer formation and lifespan, by sequestering insulin-like peptides (ILP) and preventing signaling through full length DAF-2 receptors. Here we show that DAF-2B is also important for starvation resistance, as genetic loss of daf-2b reduces survival in arrested first stage larvae (L1). Under fed conditions, we observe daf-2b splicing capacity in both the intestine and the hypodermis, but in starved L1s this becomes predominantly hypodermal. Using a novel splicing reporter system, we observe an increase in the ratio of truncated to full length insulin receptor splicing capacity in starved L1 larvae compared with fed, that may indicate a decrease in whole body insulin responsiveness. Consistent with this, overexpression of DAF-2B from the hypodermis, but not the intestine, confers increased survival to L1 animals under starvation conditions. Our findings demonstrate that the truncated insulin receptor DAF-2B is involved in the response to L1 starvation and promotes survival when expressed from the hypodermis.

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