Analysis of gene and protein expression in healthy and carious tooth pulp with cDNA microarray and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis.
ABSTRACT Complementary DNA (cDNA) microarray and two-dimensional (2-D) gel electrophoresis, combined with mass spectrometry, enable simultaneous analysis of expression patterns of thousands of genes, but their use in pulp biology has been limited. Here we compared gene and protein expression of pulp tissues from sound and carious human teeth using cDNA microarray and 2-D gel electrophoresis to evaluate their usefulness in pulp biology research and to identify the genes with changes in carious teeth. The cDNA microarray revealed several differentially expressed genes and genes with a high expression in both tissues. These genes have various functions, e.g. effects on vascular and nerve structures, inflammation, and cell differentiation. Variability between cDNA hybridizations indicates that the overall gene expression pattern may vary significantly between individual teeth. The 2-D gel electrophoresis revealed no change between healthy and diseased tissue. The identification of 96 proteins in the pulp tissue revealed none of the gene products with corresponding high/different mRNA expression in cDNA microarray. Interestingly, we detected also a hypothetical protein (putative nucleoside diphosphate kinase), and present therefore the first evidence for the existence of this protein. Even though the methods reveal potentially important gene expression, they may currently have only limited value in in vivo pulp biology research.
- SourceAvailable from: Seong Oh Kim[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The human dental follicle partially differentiates into the periodontal ligament (PDL), but their biological functions are different. The gene-expression profiles of the dental follicle and PDL were compared using the cDNA microarray technique. Microarray analysis identified 490 genes with a twofold or greater difference in expression, 365 and 125 of which were more abundant in the dental follicle and PDL, respectively. The most strongly expressed genes in the dental follicle were those related to bone development and remodeling (EGFL6, MMP8, FRZB, and NELL1), apoptosis and chemotaxis (Nox4, CXCL13, and CCL2), and tooth and embryo development (WNT2, PAX3, FGF7, AMBN, AMTN, and SLC4A4), while in the PDL it was the tumor-suppressor gene WIF1. Genes related to bone development and remodeling (STMN2, IBSP, BMP8A, BGLAP, ACP5, OPN, BMP3, and TM7SF4) and wound healing (IL1, IL8, MMP3, and MMP9) were also more strongly expressed in the PDL than in the dental follicle. In selected genes, a comparison among cDNA microarray, real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction, and immunohistochemical staining confirmed similar relative gene expressions. The gene-expression profiles presented here identify candidate genes that may enable differentiation between the dental follicle and PDL.PLoS ONE 01/2013; 8(12):e84201. · 3.73 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Human deciduous and permanent teeth exhibit different developmental processes, morphologies, histological characteristics and life cycles. In addition, their pulp tissues react differently to external stimuli, such as the pulp sensitivity test, dental trauma and pulp therapy materials. These suggest differences in gene expression and regulation, and in this study we compared gene-expression profiles of the human dental pulp from deciduous and permanent teeth. Pulp tissues from permanent premolars and deciduous molars aged 11-14 years were extirpated and mRNA was isolated for cDNA microarray analysis, and quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR). Other teeth were used for immunohistochemical analysis (IHC). Microarray analysis identified 263 genes with a twofold or greater difference in expression level between the two types of pulp tissue, 43 and 220 of which were more abundant in deciduous and permanent pulp tissues, respectively. qPCR analysis was conducted for eight randomly selected genes, and the findings were consistent with the cDNA microarray results. IHC confirmed that insulin-like growth factor 2 mRNA-binding protein 1 (IGF2BP1) was broadly expressed in deciduous dental pulp tissue, but minimally expressed in permanent dental pulp tissue. Immunohistochemical analysis showed that calbindin 1 (CALB1), leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein-coupled receptor 5 (LGR5), and gamma-aminobutyric acid A receptor beta 1 (GABRB1) were abundantly expressed in permanent predentin/odontoblasts, but only minimally expressed in deciduous dental pulp tissue. These results show that deciduous and permanent pulp tissues have different characteristics and gene expression, suggesting that they may have different functions and responses to therapies focused on pulp or dentin regeneration.PLoS ONE 01/2014; 9(7):e102893. · 3.73 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Despite all the dental information acquired over centuries and the importance of proteome research, the cross-link between these two areas only emerged around mid-nineties. Proteomic tools can help dentistry in the identification of risk factors, early diagnosis, prevention, and systematic control that will promote the evolution of treatment in all dentistry specialties. This review mainly focuses on the evolution of dentistry in different specialties based on proteomic research and how these tools can improve knowledge in dentistry. The subjects covered are an overview of proteomics in dentistry, specific information on different fields in dentistry (dental structure, restorative dentistry, endodontics, periodontics, oral pathology, oral surgery, and orthodontics) and future directions. There are many new proteomic technologies that have never been used in dentistry studies and some dentistry areas that have never been explored by proteomic tools. It is expected that a greater integration of these areas will help to understand what is still unknown in oral health and disease. J. Cell. Physiol. 228: 2271-2284, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Journal of Cellular Physiology 12/2013; 228(12):2271-84. · 4.22 Impact Factor