4.7 Article

Regulation of Selenoproteins and Methionine Sulfoxide Reductases A and B1 by Age, Calorie Restriction, and Dietary Selenium in Mice

期刊

ANTIOXIDANTS & REDOX SIGNALING
卷 12, 期 7, 页码 829-838

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ars.2009.2895

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [AG021518, GM065204, CA080946, GM061603]
  2. Korean Science and Engineering Foundation via the AgingAssociated Vascular Disease Research Center at Yeungnam University [R13-2005-005-01004-0]
  3. Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Methionine residues are susceptible to oxidation, but this damage may be reversed by methionine sulfoxide reductases MsrA and MsrB. Mammals contain one MsrA and three MsrBs, including a selenoprotein MsrB1. Here, we show that MsrB1 is the major methionine sulfoxide reductase in liver of mice and it is among the proteins that are most easily regulated by dietary selenium. MsrB1, but not MsrA activities, were reduced with age, and the selenium regulation of MsrB1 was preserved in the aging liver, suggesting that MsrB1 could account for the impaired methionine sulfoxide reduction in aging animals. We also examined regulation of Msr and selenoprotein expression by a combination of dietary selenium and calorie restriction and found that, under calorie restriction conditions, selenium regulation was preserved. In addition, mice overexpressing a mutant form of selenocysteine tRNA reduced MsrB1 activity to the level observed in selenium deficiency, whereas MsrA activity was elevated in these animals. Finally, we show that selenium regulation in inbred mouse strains is preserved in an outbred aging model. Taken together, these findings better define dietary regulation of methionine sulfoxide reduction and selenoprotein expression in mice with regard to age, calorie restriction, dietary Se, and a combination of these factors. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 12, 829-838.

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