4.1 Article

Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) is activated during normal lens development

期刊

GENE EXPRESSION PATTERNS
卷 11, 期 1-2, 页码 135-143

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gep.2010.10.005

关键词

Lens development; Unfolded Protein Response; Lens fiber cells; Endoplasmic reticulum stress; Lens differentiation

资金

  1. National Eye Institute [EY015279]
  2. University of Delaware Core Imaging facility [P20 RR16472]
  3. Sigma Xi-NAS
  4. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [P20RR016472] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE [R01EY015279] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The lens of the eye is a transparent structure responsible for focusing light onto the retina. It is composed of two morphologically different cell types, epithelial cells found on the anterior surface and the fiber cells that are continuously formed by the differentiation of epithelial cells at the lens equator. The differentiation of an epithelial precursor cell into a fiber cell is associated with a dramatic increase in membrane protein synthesis. How the terminally differentiating fiber cells cope with the increased demand on the endoplasmic reticulum for this membrane protein synthesis is not known. In the present study, we have found evidence of Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) activation during normal lens development and differentiation in the mouse. The ER-resident chaperones, immunoglobulin heavy chain binding protein (BiP) and protein disulfide isomerase (PDI), were expressed at high levels in the newly forming fiber cells of embryonic lenses. These fiber cells also expressed the UPR-associated molecules; XBP1. ATF6, phospho-PERK and ATF4 during embryogenesis. Moreover, spliced XBP1, cleaved ATF6, and phospho-eIF2 alpha were detected in embryonic mouse lenses suggesting that UPR pathways are active in this tissue. These results propose a role for UPR activation in lens fiber cell differentiation during embryogenesis. (c) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.1
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