4.5 Article

Rapid alteration in rat red blood cell copper chaperone for superoxide dismutase after marginal copper deficiency and repletion

期刊

NUTRITION RESEARCH
卷 31, 期 9, 页码 698-706

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nutres.2011.09.001

关键词

Copper-deficient; Superoxide dismutase; Copper chaperone for superoxide dismutase; Red blood cell; Biomarker

资金

  1. National Research Initiative of USDA Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service [2006-35200-17378]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is increased incidence of human copper deficiency (CuD). A sensitive and reliable blood biomarker may reveal additional cases of marginal deficiency. Two experiments were designed to test the hypothesis that the copper chaperone for superoxide dismutase (CCS) would be a robust marker after marginal CuD. Experiment I used weanling male Sprague-Dawley rats that were offered a CuD diet for 4 weeks, and samples were evaluated after 1, 2, and 4 weeks and compared with copper-adequate (CuA) controls. Furthermore, iron-deficient rats were included for comparison after 2 weeks of depletion. Red blood cell and plasma cuproenzymes were evaluated through Western blot analysis. Superoxide dismutase (Sod1) and ceruloplasmin protein were found to be altered by both iron and CuD, whereas CCS and CCS/Sod1 ratio were found to only be altered only in CuD rats and, importantly, after only 1 week of treatment. Two weeks on CuA diet restored cuproenzyme levels to control values after 4 weeks of CuD depletion. In experiment 2, marginal CuD (CuM) rats were compared with CuA and CuD rats after 2 weeks of treatment. Superoxide dismutase, ceruloplasmin, and CCS/Sod1 abundances were lower in CuM and CuD groups compared with CuA rats, but there was no statistical difference between CuM and CuD rats. However, CCS was statistically different between all groups, and abundance highly correlated with liver copper concentration. Results suggest that red blood cell CCS may be an excellent biomarker for diagnosis of rapid and marginal CuD. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.5
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