4.6 Article

Ontogenic development-associated changes in the expression of genes involved in rat bile acid homeostasis

期刊

JOURNAL OF LIPID RESEARCH
卷 48, 期 6, 页码 1362-1370

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1194/jlr.M700034-JLR200

关键词

cholesterol; CYP7A1; CYP8B1; cytochrome P450 enzymes; fetus; intestine; liver; nuclear receptor; senescence; synthesis; transport; weaning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ontogenic changes in the rat bile acid ( BA) pool, measured enzymatically and by GC-MS, and expression of enzymes (5 alpha-reductase, 5 beta-reductase, and cytochrome P450 enzymes Cyp7a1, Cyp8b1, Cyp27 and Cyp3a11), transporters [bile salt export pump, sodium taurocholate-cotransporting polypeptide, apical sodium-dependent bile acid transporter, and organic solute transporter alpha/beta (Ost alpha/Ost beta)], and nuclear receptors [fetoprotein transcription factor (Ftf), farnesoid X receptor (Fxr), small heterodimer partner (Shp), and hepatic nuclear factor 4 alpha (HNF-4 alpha)], determined by quantitative PCR, were investigated. The absolute size of the BA pool increased progressively up to adulthood, whereas the complexity of its composition was high in fetuses, decreased after birth, increased again progressively up to adulthood, and decreased in aged animals. Allo-cholic acid only appeared early in development, in spite of low 5 alpha-reductase expression. The relative size of the BA pool, corrected by liver weight, was maintained from 1 week after birth, except at weaning, when a transient peak accompanied by Shp downregulation and Cyp7a1 upregulation was observed. An imposed weaning delay of 1 week had no effect on the time course of the BA pool size but decreased the proportion of chenodeoxycholic and alpha-muricholic acids, whereas the proportion of cholic acid was increased, probably as a result of Cyp8b1 upregulation. In conclusion, changes in the expression of genes involved in BA homeostasis may play a role in physiological adaptations to digestive functions during the rat life span.

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