4.7 Review

Evolution, regulation, and function of porcine selenogenome

期刊

FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
卷 127, 期 -, 页码 116-123

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2018.04.560

关键词

Evolution; Gene; Pig; Selenium; Selenoprotein; Tissue

资金

  1. Major International (Regional) Joint Research Program of the Natural Science Foundation of China [31320103920]
  2. 111 Project from the Education Ministry of China [B18053]
  3. NIH [DK 53018]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of China [31572382]
  5. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFA010320]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Much less research on regulation and function of selenoproteins has been conducted in domestic pigs than in rodents or humans, although pigs are an excellent model of human nutrition and medicine and pork is a widely consumed meat in the world. Phylogenetically, the 25 identified porcine selenoproteins fell into two primitive groups, and might be further divided into three parallel branches. Despite a high similarity to that of humans and rodents, the porcine selenoproteome exhibited the closest evolutionary relationship with that of sheep and cattle among eight domestic species. Expression (mRNA, protein, and/or enzyme activity) of 2/3 of the 25 porcine selenoproteins in various tissues of pigs was affected by dietary Se intakes, and 14 of them showed responses to a high fat diet. When dietary Se deficiency mainly down-regulated the expression of selected selenoproteins, dietary Se excess exerted rather diverse effects on their expression. Overdosing pigs with dietary Se induced hyperinsulinemia, along with lipid accumulation and protein increase, in the liver and muscle by affecting key genes and(or) proteins involved in the metabolisms of glucose, lipid, and protein. In conclusion, expression of porcine selenoproteins was highly responsive to dietary Se and fat intakes, and was involved in body glucose, lipid, and protein metabolism as those of rodents and humans.

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