4.7 Article

Transgenerational Glucose Intolerance With Igf2/H19 Epigenetic Alterations in Mouse Islet Induced by Intrauterine Hyperglycemia

期刊

DIABETES
卷 61, 期 5, 页码 1133-1142

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db11-1314

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2012CB944901]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30973209, 31171444, 30901616, 30901604]
  3. Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education [20100101110129]
  4. Key Subjects Group of Reproductive Medicine at Zhejiang Province [XKQ-009-002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) has been shown to be associated with high risk of diabetes in offspring. However, the mechanisms involved and the possibilities of transgenerational transmission are still unclear. We intercrossed male and female adult control and first-generation offspring of GDM (F1-GDM) mice to obtain the second-generation (F2) offspring in four groups: C male-C female, C male-GDM female, GDM male-C female, and GDM male-GDM female. We found that birth weight significantly increased in F2 offspring through the paternal line with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). Regardless of birth from F1-GDM with or without IGT, high risk of IGT appeared as early as 3 weeks in F2 offspring and progressed through both parental lineages, especial the paternal line. IGT in male offspring was more obvious than that in females, with parental characteristics and sex-specific transmission. In both F1 and F2 offspring of GDM, the expression of imprinted genes Igf2 and H19 was downregulated in pancreatic islets, caused by abnormal methylation status of the differentially methylated region, which may be one of the mechanisms for impaired islet ultrastructure and function. Furthermore, altered Igf2 and H19 gene expression was found in sperm of adult F1-GDM, regardless of the presence of IGT, indicating that changes of epigenetics in germ cells contributed to transgenerational transmission. Diabetes 61:1133-1142, 2012

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