| Literature DB >> 22496881 |
Chia-Hung Kao1, Chien-Yun Hsiang, Tin-Yun Ho.
Abstract
Chitosan has been widely used in food industry as a weight-loss aid and a cholesterol-lowering agent. Previous studies have shown that chitosan affects metabolic responses and contributes to anti-diabetic, hypocholesteremic, and blood glucose-lowering effects; however, the in vivo targeting sites and mechanisms of chitosan remain to be clarified. In this study, we constructed transgenic mice, which carried the luciferase genes driven by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR), a key regulator of fatty acid and glucose metabolism. Bioluminescent imaging of PPAR transgenic mice was applied to report the organs that chitosan acted on, and gene expression profiles of chitosan-targeted organs were further analyzed to elucidate the mechanisms of chitosan. Bioluminescent imaging showed that constitutive PPAR activities were detected in brain and gastrointestinal tract. Administration of chitosan significantly activated the PPAR activities in brain and stomach. Microarray analysis of brain and stomach showed that several pathways involved in lipid and glucose metabolism were regulated by chitosan. Moreover, the expression levels of metabolism-associated genes like apolipoprotein B (apoB) and ghrelin genes were down-regulated by chitosan. In conclusion, these findings suggested the feasibility of PPAR bioluminescent imaging-guided transcriptomic analysis on the evaluation of chitosan-affected metabolic responses in vivo. Moreover, we newly identified that downregulated expression of apoB and ghrelin genes were novel mechanisms for chitosan-affected metabolic responses in vivo.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22496881 PMCID: PMC3319625 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034969
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Construction and optimization of PPRE reporter constructs.
(A) The schematic diagram of PPRE reporter constructs. Two PPRE oligonucleotides were annealed and ligated to form various tandem repeats of PPRE. The resulting products were analyzed by 8% polyacrylamide gels (left panel). Eight reporter constructs containing various numbers of PPREs were shown on the right. (B) Effect of rosiglitazone on the inducibility of PPRE reporter constructs. HepG2 cells were transiently transfected with PPRE constructs and pcDNA3.1/lacZ DNA, and treated without or with 0.5 µM rosiglitazone. Luciferase and β-galactosidase activities were determined 24 hours later. Luciferase activities are expressed as induction fold, which is presented as comparison with RLU related to untreated cells. β-Galactosidase activities are expressed as OD420. Values are mean ± standard error of three independent assays. **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, compared with untreated cells. (C) In vitro imaging. HepG2 cells were transiently transfected with PPRE constructs containing 5 tandem repeats of PPRE and treated without or with 0.5 µM rosiglitazone. Luciferase activity was imaged at 24 h by IVIS system. The color overlay on the image represents the photon/sec emitted from the cells, as indicated by the color scale. Quantification of photon emission from the cells was shown at the bottom. Values are mean ± standard error of three independent assays. ***p<0.001, compared with mock. Photos are representative images.
Figure 2PPAR-dependent bioluminescence in living mice and individual organs.
(A) In vivo imaging. Transgenic mice were orally administered saline (mock) or 50 mg/kg rosiglitazone and imaged 6 hours later. The color overlay on the image represents the photon/sec emitted from the animals, as indicated by the color scales. Quantification of photon emission from the mice was shown at the bottom. Values are mean ± standard error (n=6 per group). *p<0.05, **p<0.01, compared with mock. (B) Ex vivo imaging. Transgenic mice were orally administered saline (mock) or 50 mg/kg rosiglitazone. Six hours later, mice were sacrificed and organs were subjected to image. Quantification of photon emission from the organs was shown at the bottom. Values are mean ± standard error (n=6 per group). Photos are representative images.
Figure 3PPAR-dependent bioluminescence in living mice and individual organs after chitosan administration.
(A) Time course. Transgenic mice were subcutaneously injected saline (mock) or chitosan, and images at indicated periods. Results are expressed as relative intensity, which is presented as comparison with the luminescent intensity relative to mock. Values are mean ± standard error (n=6 per group). (B) Ex vivo imaging and quantification of photon emission from individual organs. Transgenic mice were subcutaneously injected saline (mock) or chitosan, and sacrificed 3 days later for organ imaging. Values are mean ± standard error (n=6 per group). *p<0.05, ***p<0.001, compared with mock. The color overlay on the image represents the photon/sec emitted from the organs, as indicated by the color scale. Photos are representative images.
Classification of chitosan-regulated genes in the stomach by KEGG pathways.
| KEGG pathway | Stomach | |
| Observed (total) |
| |
| Oxidative phosphorylation | 38 (108) | 8.75×10−11 |
| Ribosome | 20 (80) | 2.17×10−8 |
| Cell communication | 21 (109) | 6.11×10−5 |
| IL6 signaling pathway | 4 (29) | 0.0037 |
| Pyruvate metabolism | 11 (37) | 0.0040 |
| GnRH signaling pathway | 14 (90) | 0.0105 |
| TNF-α signaling pathway | 3 (34) | 0.0105 |
| Glycolysis/Gluconeogenesis | 14 (53) | 0.0107 |
| Benzoate degradation | 2 (7) | 0.0215 |
| Glycerolipid metabolism | 9 (46) | 0.0215 |
| IFNγ signaling pathway | 11 (65) | 0.0215 |
| LPS signaling pathway | 11 (66) | 0.0215 |
| Ether lipid metabolism | 6 (29) | 0.0249 |
| Wnt signaling pathway | 14 (144) | 0.0325 |
| Glutathione metabolism | 9 (41) | 0.0363 |
| IL12 signaling pathway | 4 (26) | 0.0476 |
| Insulin signaling pathway | 8 (91) | 0.0476 |
“Observed" means the number of genes regulated by chitosan in this pathway. “Total" means the total number of genes in this pathway.
p-Value was calculated on WebGestalt web site (http://bioinfo.vanderbilt.edu/webgestalt/login.php) by hypergeometric test.
Classification of chitosan-regulated genes in the brain by KEGG pathways.
| KEGG pathway | Brain | |
| Observed (total) |
| |
| Oxidative phosphorylation | 25 (108) | 5.94×10−6 |
| Ribosome | 22 (80) | 4.49×10−7 |
| Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis | 3 (17) | 0.0117 |
| Gas6 signaling pathway | 4 (18) | 0.0117 |
| Long-term depression | 16 (73) | 0.0117 |
| TNF-α signaling pathway | 7 (34) | 0.0117 |
| PDGF signaling pathway | 4 (27) | 0.0130 |
| Gap junction | 16 (81) | 0.0258 |
| Long-term potentiation | 14 (64) | 0.0258 |
| GnRH signaling pathway | 15 (90) | 0.0345 |
| Regulation of actin cytoskeleton | 22 (193) | 0.0345 |
| Insulin signaling pathway | 11 (91) | 0.0359 |
| Alanine and aspartate metabolism | 3 (30) | 0.0416 |
| EGF signaling pathway | 9 (41) | 0.0416 |
| Tight junction | 17 (112) | 0.0416 |
| Regulation of Ck1/Cdk5 | 3 (9) | 0.0416 |
| IGF signaling pathway | 8 (54) | 0.0452 |
“Observed" means the number of genes regulated by chitosan in this pathway. “Total" means the total number of genes in this pathway.
p-Value was calculated on WebGestalt web site (http://bioinfo.vanderbilt.edu/webgestalt/login.php) by hypergeometric test.
Expression levels of ghrelin, apoB, xpo4, pin1, penk1, and prdx2 genes by qPCR.
| Sample | Average CT of target | Average CT of GAPDH | ΔCT
| ΔΔCT
| Relative to mock |
| Ghrelin | |||||
| Mock | 17.77±0.02 | 17.56±0.02 | 0.21±0.03 | 0.00±0.03 | 1.00 |
| Chitosan | 21.20±0.02 | 17.57±0.01 | 3.63±0.02 | 3.42±0.02 | 0.09 |
| ApoB | |||||
| Mock | 26.14±0.02 | 17.56±0.02 | 8.58±0.03 | 0.00±0.03 | 1.00 |
| Chitosan | 29.02±0.05 | 17.57±0.01 | 11.45±0.05 | 2.86±0.05 | 0.13 |
| Xpo4 | |||||
| Mock | 27.20±0.11 | 18.56±0.10 | 8.64±0.15 | 0.00±0.15 | 1.00 |
| Chitosan | 26.81±0.07 | 18.93±0.05 | 7.88±0.09 | −0.76±0.09 | 1.70 |
| Pin1 | |||||
| Mock | 24.11±0.02 | 18.56±0.10 | 5.54±0.10 | 0.00±0.10 | 1.00 |
| Chitosan | 24.04±0.04 | 18.93±0.05 | 5.11±0.07 | −0.43±0.07 | 1.35 |
| Penk1 | |||||
| Mock | 25.07±0.04 | 18.39±0.04 | 6.68±0.06 | 0.00±0.06 | 1.00 |
| Chitosan | 22.36±0.06 | 17.76±0.10 | 4.60±0.12 | −2.08±0.12 | 4.23 |
| Prdx2 | |||||
| Mock | 22.00±0.00 | 18.39±0.04 | 3.61±0.04 | 0.00±0.04 | 1.00 |
| Chitosan | 20.25±0.07 | 17.76±0.10 | 2.49±0.12 | −1.12±0.12 | 2.18 |
The RNAs from stomach (ghrelin, apoB, xpo4, and pin1 genes) and brain (penk1 and prdx2 genes) were analyzed for indicated genes by qPCR.
The ΔCT value is determined by subtracting the average CT of GAPDH from that of target gene. The standard deviation of the difference is calculated from the standard deviations of the target gene and GAPDH.
The calculation of ΔΔCT involves subtraction by the ΔCT calibrator value. This is a subtraction of an arbitrary constant, so the standard deviation of ΔΔCT is the same as the standard deviation of the ΔCT value.