4.3 Article

Identification of a novel inducible cytosolic Hsp70 gene in Chinese shrimp Fenneropenaeus chinensis and comparison of its expression with the cognate Hsc70 under different stresses

期刊

CELL STRESS & CHAPERONES
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 83-93

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12192-009-0124-y

关键词

Heat shock proteins; Hsp70; Heat shock; Heavy metal; Stress; Fenneropenaeus chinensis

资金

  1. National HighTech Research and Development Program of China (863 program) [2006AA09Z424, 2006AA10A402]
  2. Major State Basic Research Development Program of China (973 program) [2006CB101804]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70) family is widely expressed in eukaryotic cells as the major chaperone protein. In this study, the full-length complementary DNA (cDNA) of a novel inducible cytosolic Hsp70 family member (FcHsp70) was cloned from Fenneropenaeus chinensis. FcHsp70 full-length cDNA consists of 2,511 bp with a 1,890-bp open reading frame encoding 629 amino acids. Three Hsp70 protein family signatures, IDLGTTYS, IIDLGGGTFDVSIL, and IVLVGGSTRIPKVQK, were found in the predicted FcHsp70 amino acid sequence. Phylogenetic analysis showed that FcHsp70 was categorized together with the inducible HSP70s reported in other crustaceans. Compared to the previously identified cognate Hsp70 (FcHsc70) in F. chinensis, the expression of FcHsp70 showed quite different expression profiles when the shrimp were subjected to different stresses including heat shock and heavy metal treatments. Under heat shock treatment, the expression of FcHsp70 showed much higher up-regulation than FcHsc70. Copper treatment also induced higher up-regulation of FcHsp70 than FcHsc70. Cadmium treatment did not induce the expression of FcHsp70, but caused down-regulation of FcHsc70. The different expression profiles of FcHsp70 and FcHsc70 in shrimp may indicate their different reactions to different stresses. Therefore, Hsp70 or Hsc70 could be developed as a biomarker to indicate different stresses in shrimp.

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

4.3
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