Gene expression profiling of diaphragm muscle in α2-laminin (merosin)-deficient dy/dy dystrophic mice
ABSTRACT Deficiency of alpha2-laminin (merosin) underlies classical congenital muscular dystrophy in humans and dy/dy muscular dystrophy in mice and causes severe muscle dysfunction in both species. To gain greater insight into the biochemical and molecular events that link alpha2-laminin deficiency with muscle fiber necrosis, and the associated compensatory responses, gene expression profiles were characterized in diaphragm muscle from 8-wk-old dy/dy mice using oligonucleotide microarrays. Compared with age-matched normal muscle, dystrophic diaphragm was characterized by predominantly augmented gene expression, irrespective of the fold-change threshold. Among the 69 genes with at least plus or minus twofold significantly altered expression, 30 belonged to statistically overrepresented Gene Ontology (GO) biological process groups. These covered four specific themes: development including muscle development, cell motility with an emphasis on muscle contraction, defense/immune response, and cell adhesion. An additional 11 gene transcripts were assigned to more general overrepresented GO biological process groups (e.g., cellular process, organismal physiological process); the remaining 28 did not belong to any overrepresented groups. GO cellular constituent assignment resulted in the highest degree of overrepresentation in extracellular and muscle fiber locations, whereas GO molecular function assignment was most notable for various types of binding. RT-PCR was performed on 38 of 41 genes with at least plus or minus twofold significantly altered expression that were assigned to overrepresented GO biological process groups, with expression changes verified for 36 of 38 genes. These results indicate that several specific groups of genes have altered expression in response to genetic alpha2-laminin deficiency, with both similarities and differences compared with data reported for dystrophin-deficient muscular dystrophies.
- SourceAvailable from: Douglas G Howe
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "This type of experiment often leads to the identification of hundreds of differences in the expression of genes. Statistical analysis tools using GO annotations in the context of the GO hierarchy are used to cluster those genes into functional categories (Jensen et al., 2004; Xu et al., 2007; Hecht et al., 2007; Zhu et al., 2007; Matsuki et al., 2005; van Lunteren et al., 2006; Clemente et al., 2006; Agbemafle et al., 2005; Ivins et al., 2005; Choi et al., 2007; Baguma-Nibasheka et al., 2007; Vaes et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2004; Li et al., 2006). An example of this type of experiment is the one carried out by James et al to study gene expression during chondrocyte differentiation (James et al., 2005). "
ABSTRACT: Developmental biology, like many other areas of biology, has undergone a dramatic shift in the perspective from which developmental processes are viewed. Instead of focusing on the actions of a handful of genes or functional RNAs, we now consider the interactions of large functional gene networks and study how these complex systems orchestrate the unfolding of an organism, from gametes to adult. Developmental biologists are beginning to realize that understanding ontogeny on this scale requires the utilization of computational methods to capture, store and represent the knowledge we have about the underlying processes. Here we review the use of the Gene Ontology (GO) to study developmental biology. We describe the organization and structure of the GO and illustrate some of the ways we use it to capture the current understanding of many common developmental processes. We also discuss ways in which gene product annotations using the GO have been used to ask and answer developmental questions in a variety of model developmental systems. We provide suggestions as to how the GO might be used in more powerful ways to address questions about development. Our goal is to provide developmental biologists with enough background about the GO that they can begin to think about how they might use the ontology efficiently and in the most powerful ways possible.Molecular Reproduction and Development 01/2009; 77(4):314-29. DOI:10.1002/mrd.21130 · 2.68 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The routine measurement of the expression of tens of thousands of gene transcripts, simultaneously, is a defining advance of the last decade which has been made possible by microarray technology. Using this very powerful approach, a pattern has emerged from a number of studies that suggest a molecular niche for the diaphragm which is quite different from that occupied by limb muscle. All indications are that this is true not only in regard to differential gene transcription patterns in healthy muscles but also in the changes in transcription occurring in association with different diseases. Furthermore, respiratory muscle mounts a rich gene expression response to a number of disturbances, be they primary genetic defects (e.g. various types of muscular dystrophies) or non-genetic perturbations (e.g. controlled mechanical ventilation). Large numbers of genes undergo altered levels of transcription, ranging from tens to hundreds (typical) to thousands. These genes are involved in diverse cellular processes, such as contraction, intermediate metabolism, oxidative stress, apoptosis and cellular adhesion. Functional groups of genes identified as having changed expression differ in many respects from one disease to another. Previously identified pathways of muscle injury and repair are often perturbed to greater extents than previously anticipated, and processes not previously suspected of having important roles in the pathophysiology of specific disorders have been identified. Elucidation of these under-appreciated molecular events may lead to novel therapeutic interventions based on disrupting the downstream adverse consequences of the primary event or facilitating events which ameliorate the injury and/or promote muscle healing.Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology 06/2007; 156(2):103-15. DOI:10.1016/j.resp.2006.11.007 · 1.97 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Diabetes has far-ranging effects on cardiac structure and function. Previous gene expression studies of the heart in animal models of type 1 diabetes concur that there is altered expression of genes involved in lipid and protein metabolism, but they diverge with regard to expression changes involving many other functional groups of genes of mechanistic importance in diabetes-induced cardiac dysfunction. To obtain additional information about these controversial areas, genome-wide expression was assessed using microarrays in left ventricle from streptozotocin-diabetic and normal rats. There were 261 genes with statistically significant altered expression of at least +/-1.5-fold, of which 124 were increased and 137 reduced by diabetes. Gene ontology assignment testing identified several statistical significantly overrepresented groups among genes with altered expression, which differed for increased compared with reduced expression. Relevant gene groups with increased expression by diabetes included lipid metabolism (P < 0.001, n = 13 genes, fold change 1.5 to 14.6) and oxidoreductase activity (P < 0.001, n = 17, fold change 1.5 to 4.6). Groups with reduced expression by diabetes included morphogenesis (P < 0.00001, n = 28, fold change -1.5 to -5.1), extracellular matrix (P < 0.02, n = 9, fold change -1.5 to -3.9), cell adhesion (P < 0.05, n = 10, fold change -1.5 to -2.7), and calcium ion binding (P < 0.01, n = 13, fold change -1.5 to -3.0). Array findings were verified by quantitative PCR for 36 genes. These data combined with previous findings strengthen the evidence for diabetes-induced cardiac gene expression changes involved in cell growth and development, oxidoreductase activity, and the extracellular matrix and also point out other gene groups not previously identified as being affected, such as those involved in calcium ion homeostasis.AJP Endocrinology and Metabolism 09/2007; 293(3):E759-68. DOI:10.1152/ajpendo.00191.2007 · 4.09 Impact Factor