4.7 Review

Reactive oxygen species and uncoupling protein 2 in pancreatic beta-cell function

期刊

DIABETES OBESITY & METABOLISM
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 141-148

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2010.01269.x

关键词

antioxidant; beta-cell; GSIS; oxidative stress; ROS signalling; UCP2

资金

  1. NIH [DK54024, DK76788, ES016005]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [K01DK076788, R01DK054024] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES [R01ES016005] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Growing evidence indicates that reactive oxygen species (ROS) are not just deleterious by-products of respiratory metabolism in mitochondria, but can be essential elements for many biological responses, including in pancreatic beta-cells. ROS can be a 'second-messenger signal' in response to hormone/receptor activation that serves as part of the 'code' to trigger the ultimate biological response, or it can be a 'protective signal' to increase the levels of antioxidant enzymes and small molecules to scavenge ROS, thus restoring cellular redox homeostasis. In pancreatic beta-cells evidence is emerging that acute and transient glucose-dependent ROS contributes to normal glucose-stimulated insulin secretion (GSIS). However, chronic and persistent elevation of ROS, resulting from inflammation or excessive metabolic fuels such as glucose and fatty acids, may elevate antioxidant enzymes such that they blunt ROS and redox signalling, thus impairing beta-cell function. An interesting mitochondrial protein whose main function appears to be the control of ROS is uncoupling protein 2 (UCP2). Despite continuing investigation of the exact mechanism by which UCP2 is 'activated', it is clear that UCP2 levels and/or activity impact the efficacy of GSIS in pancreatic islets. This review will focus on the paradoxical roles of ROS in pancreatic beta-cell function and the regulatory role of UCP2 in ROS signalling and GSIS.

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