| Title |
Comparative microarray analyses of mono(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate impacts on fat cell bioenergetics and adipokine network
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell Biology and Toxicology, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10565-016-9380-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Huai-Chih Chiang, Chih-Hong Wang, Szu-Ching Yeh, Yi-Hua Lin, Ya-Ting Kuo, Chih-Wei Liao, Feng-Yuan Tsai, Wei-Yu Lin, Wen-Han Chuang, Tsui-Chun Tsou |
| Abstract |
Cellular accumulation of mono(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (MEHP) has been recently demonstrated to disturb fat cell energy metabolism; however, the underlying mechanism remained unclear. The study aimed to determine how MEHP influenced fat cell transcriptome and how the changes might contribute to bioenergetics. Because of the pivotal role of PPARγ in energy metabolism of fat cells, comparative microarray analysis of gene expression in 3T3-L1 adipocytes treated with both MEHP and rosiglitazone was performed. Pathway enrichment analysis and gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis revealed that both treatments caused up-regulation of genes involved in PPAR signaling/energy metabolism-related pathways and down-regulation of genes related to adipokine/inflammation signals. MEHP/rosiglitazone-treated adipocytes exhibited increased levels of lipolysis, glucose uptake, and glycolysis; the gene expression profiles provided molecular basis for the functional changes. Moreover, MEHP was shown to induce nuclear translocation and activation of PPARγ. The similarity in gene expression and functional changes in response to MEHP and rosiglitazone suggested that MEHP influenced bioenergetics and adipokine network mainly via PPARγ. Importantly, adipokine levels in C57BL/6J mice with di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) treatments provided in vivo evidence for microarray results. On the basis of correlation between gene expression and functional assays, possible involvements of genes in bioenergetics of MEHP-treated adipocytes were proposed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 20% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2017.
All research outputs
#18,518,987
of 22,940,083 outputs
Outputs from Cell Biology and Toxicology
#366
of 485 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#312,105
of 422,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Biology and Toxicology
#10
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,940,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 485 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.