3.9 Article

Visualization of Sex-Dimorphic Changes in the Intestinal Transcriptome of Fabp2 Gene-Ablated Mice

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUTRIGENETICS AND NUTRIGENOMICS
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 45-55

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000337193

Keywords

Sex differences; Fatty acid binding proteins; Transcriptome analysis; Lipid metabolism; KEGG pathways; Method; Small intestine

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation
  3. Canada Research Chairs program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Aims: Sex differences in gene expression program have not been effectively explored at the transcriptome level. We aimed to develop a method for the analysis of transcriptome data to identify sex differences and sex-dimorphic responses to experimental conditions in mice. Methods: Profiling of the small intestine transcriptome of chow-fed C57BL/6J (wildtype, WT) and Fabp2(-/-) mice was carried out by microarray analysis. Sex-specific and androgynous effects of Fabp2 gene ablation were examined using FlexArray V1.6 by comparing WT to Fabp2(-/-) mice. The data generated were exported into a single spreadsheet, collated and transformed to identify the differentially expressed genes for pathway analysis. Results: The method revealed enrichment of 17 sex-dimorphic pathways in the small intestine of WT mice compared to only 4 in Fabp2(-/-) mice. Comparison of the effects of Fabp2 loss in individual sexes revealed a male-specific upregulation of 5 pathways involved in the production of unsaturated fatty acids, and a female-specific downregulation of pathways involved in xenobiotic metabolism. Conclusions: Our approach detected the common as well as sex-differential pathways that are modified due to the loss of Fabp2. These findings suggest that the pathways involved in nutrient and xenobiotic metabolism in the intestine are regulated by sex-specific mechanisms. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available