4.3 Article

The role of heat shock proteins in inflammatory injury induced by cold stress in chicken hearts

期刊

CELL STRESS & CHAPERONES
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 773-783

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12192-013-0429-8

关键词

Cold stress; Heat shock proteins; Inflammatory injury; Chicken heart

资金

  1. technological innovation projects special funds of Harbin, China [2010RFXXN041]
  2. science and technology innovation outstanding youth funds of Harbin [RC2013QN002065]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of cold stress on the expression levels of heat shock proteins (Hsps90, 70, 60, 40, and 27) and inflammatory factors (iNOS, COX-2, NF-kappa B, TNF-alpha, and PTGEs) and oxidative indexes in hearts of chickens. Two hundred forty 15-day-old male chickens were randomly divided into 12 groups and kept at the temperature of 12 +/- 1 A degrees C for acute and chronic cold stress. There were one control group and five treatment groups for acute cold stress, three control groups, and three treatment groups for chronic cold stress. After cold stress, malondialdehyde level increased in chicken heart; the activity of superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase in the heart first increased and then decreased. The inflammatory factors mRNA levels were increased in cold stress groups relative to control groups. The histopathological analysis showed that heart tissues were seriously injured in the cold stress group. Additionally, the mRNA levels of Hsps (70, 60, 40, and 27) increased significantly (P < 0.05) in the cold stress groups relative to the corresponding control group. Meanwhile, the mRNA level and protein expression of Hsp90 decreased significantly (P < 0.05) in the stress group, and showed a gradually decreasing tendency. These results suggested that the levels of inflammatory factors and Hsps expression levels in heart tissues can be influenced by cold stress. Hsps commonly played an important role in the protection of the heart after cold stress.

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

4.3
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