4.7 Article

Early alteration of epigenetic-related transcription in Huntington's disease mouse models

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-28185-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad
  2. Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional [SAF2011-22506, SAF2014-56197-R, PCIN-2015-192-C02-01, SEV-2013-0317, CP15/00180, PI16/00722, PI15/01147]
  3. Instituto de Salud Carlos III
  4. Generalitat Valenciana [PROMETEO/2016/006]
  5. Miguel Servet I contract [CP15/00180]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transcriptional dysregulation in Huntington's disease (HD) affects the expression of genes involved in survival and neuronal functions throughout the progression of the pathology. In recent years, extensive research has focused on epigenetic and chromatin-modifying factors as a causative explanation for such dysregulation, offering attractive targets for pharmacological therapies. In this work, we extensively examined the gene expression profiles in the cortex, striatum, hippocampus and cerebellum of juvenile R6/1 and N171-82Q mice, models of rapidly progressive HD, to retrieve the early transcriptional signatures associated with this pathology. These profiles were largely consistent across HD datasets, contained tissular and neuronal-specific genes and showed significant correspondence with the transcriptional changes in mouse strains deficient for epigenetic regulatory genes. The most prominent cases were the conditional knockout of the lysine acetyltransferase CBP in post-mitotic forebrain neurons, the double knockout of the histone methyltransferases Ezh1 and Ezh2, components of the polycomb repressor complex 2 (PRC2), and the conditional mutants of the histone methyltransferases G9a (Ehmt2) and GLP (Ehmt1). Based on these observations, we propose that the neuronal epigenetic status is compromised in the prodromal stages of HD, leading to an altered transcriptional programme that is prominently involved in neuronal identity.

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