4.6 Article

Metabotyping of the C. elegans sir-2.1 Mutant Using in Vivo Labeling and 13C-Heteronuclear Multidimensional NMR Metabolomics

期刊

ACS CHEMICAL BIOLOGY
卷 7, 期 12, 页码 2012-2018

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cb3004226

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Health Welfare, Korea [1120300]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  3. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Korea [2012011362, 20110030635, 2010-0026035]
  4. Ministry for Health and Wealfare, Republic of Korea [A092006]
  5. Korea Health Promotion Institute [1120300] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012R1A2A2A01011362, 2009-0093144, 과C6A2102, 2010-0026035, 과06A1204] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The roles of sir-2.1 in C. elegans lifespan extension have been subjects of recent public and academic debates. We applied an efficient workflow for in vivo C-13-labeling of C. elegans and C-13-heteronuclear NMR metabolomics to characterizing the metabolic phenotypes of the sir-2.1 mutant. Our method delivered sensitivity 2 orders of magnitude higher than that of the unlabeled approach, enabling 2D and 3D NMR experiments. Multivariate analysis of the NMR data showed distinct metabolic profiles of the mutant, represented by increases in glycolysis, nitrogen catabolism, and initial lipolysis. The metabolomic analysis defined the sir-2.1 mutant metabotype as the decoupling between enhanced catabolic pathways and ATP generation. We also suggest the relationship between the metabotypes, especially the branched chain amino acids, and the roles of sir-2.1 in the worm lifespan. Our results should contribute to solidifying the roles of sir-2.1, and the described workflow can be applied to studying many other proteins in metabolic perspectives.

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

4.6
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