4.7 Article

Study on the mechanism of scutellarin?s protective effect against ZEA-induced mouse ovarian granulosa cells injury eng

期刊

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
卷 170, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2022.113481

关键词

Zearalenone; Scutellarin; Ovarian granulosa cells; Proteomics; RIPK1

资金

  1. Central Government Guides Local Sci-ence and Technology Development Projects of Shanxi Province
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China
  3. [YDZJSX 2021A035]
  4. [32172904]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reveals that Scu can protect ovarian granulosa cells from ZEA-induced damage by regulating multiple targets and pathways, and possibly by inhibiting apoptosis of GCs.
Zearalenone (ZEA), a mycotoxin produced by Fusarium, can cause reproductive disorders by targeting ovarian granulosa cells (GCs). We previous showed that scutellarin (Scu) rescues ZEA-induced GCs damage in mice. In this study, we employed iTRAQ-based proteomics to investigate the mechanism underlying the restorative effects of Scu in this model. Compared to the model group, we identified 415 differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) in both the control and Scu-treated groups, and found that these were enriched mainly in the biosynthesis and metabolism, drug metabolism, and pentose phosphate pathway. Moreover, the MAPK and heat shock protein-necroptosis pathway were implicated in regulating ZEA toxicity and the protective effect of Scu. Receptor -interacting serine threonine-protein kinase 1 (RIPK1) showed the highest fold-change in expression in the Scu-treated group. Small-interfering RNA-mediated RIPK1 knockdown further promoted the increase in cleaved-caspase-3 expression induced by ZEA, but not in the cells treated with Scu. These data indicated the involve-ment of multiple targets and pathways in the protective effect of Scu against ZEA-induced damage. Our findings also indicated that RIPK1 may be involved in the inhibition of GCs apoptosis induced by ZEA.

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