| Title |
Echinacoside Protects Against MPP+-Induced Neuronal Apoptosis via ROS/ATF3/CHOP Pathway Regulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuroscience Bulletin, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12264-016-0047-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qing Zhao, Xiaoyan Yang, Dingfang Cai, Ling Ye, Yuqing Hou, Lijun Zhang, Jiwei Cheng, Yuan Shen, Kaizhe Wang, Yu Bai |
| Abstract |
Echinacoside (ECH) is protective in a mouse model of Parkinson's disease (PD) induced by 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium ion (MPP(+)). To investigate the mechanisms involved, SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells were treated with MPP(+) or a combination of MPP(+) and ECH, and the expression of ATF3 (activating transcription factor 3), CHOP (C/EBP-homologous protein), SCNA (synuclein alpha), and GDNF (glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor) was assessed. The results showed that ECH significantly improved cell survival by inhibiting the generation of MPP(+)-induced reactive oxygen species (ROS). In addition, ECH suppressed the ROS and MPP(+)-induced expression of apoptotic genes (ATF3, CHOP, and SCNA). ECH markedly decreased the MPP(+)-induced caspase-3 activity in a dose-dependent manner. ATF3-knockdown also decreased the CHOP and cleaved caspase-3 levels and inhibited the apoptosis induced by MPP(+). Interestingly, ECH partially restored the GDNF expression that was down-regulated by MPP(+). ECH also improved dopaminergic neuron survival during MPP(+) treatment and protected these neurons against the apoptosis induced by MPTP. Taken together, these data suggest that the ROS/ATF3/CHOP pathway plays a critical role in mechanisms by which ECH protects against MPP(+)-induced apoptosis in PD. |
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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,132,412
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from Neuroscience Bulletin
#89
of 775 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,865
of 363,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroscience Bulletin
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 775 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
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 363,150 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them