4.7 Article

ABC transporter expression profiling after ischemic reperfusion injury in mouse kidney

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
卷 69, 期 12, 页码 2186-2193

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ki.5000407

关键词

acute renal failure; renal protection; ABC transporter; expression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Renal ATP binding cassette (ABC) transporters have an important role in the elimination of metabolic waste products and compounds foreign to the body. The kidney has the ability to tightly control the expression of these efflux transporters to maintain homeostasis, and as a major mechanism of adaptation to environmental stress. In the present study, we investigated the expression of 45 ABC transporter genes in the mouse kidney under basal conditions, after induction of ischemia and after regeneration. Two days after clamping, mice showed a 76% decrease in renal creatinine clearance, which improved clearly within 7 days. This was confirmed by histological examinations. Seven days after ischemia, real-time quantitative Polymerase chain reaction data showed that transcript abundance of abcb1, abcb11, and abcc4 was increased, and that of abca3, abcc2, and abcg2 decreased. Expression of all transporters returned to baseline after 14 days, except for abcb11, which was reduced. Abcb11 is the major liver canalicular bile salt export pump. Here we show for the first time expression in the kidney and localization of the transporter to the apical membrane of proximal tubules. The presence of another novel renal transporter, abca3, was confirmed by Western blotting. Immunohistochemistry showed that abca3 is localized to the peritubular capillaries and apical membrane of proximal tubules. In conclusion, after inducing ischemic reperfusion injury in the kidney, ABC transporters appear to be differentially regulated, which might be associated with the renal regeneration process. Furthermore, we showed for the first time expression and subcellular localization of abcb11 and abca3 in mouse kidney.

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