PPARα-mediated peroxisome induction compensates PPARγ-deficiency in bronchiolar club cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the important functions of PPARγ in various cell types of the lung, PPARγ-deficiency in club cells induces only mild emphysema. Peroxisomes are distributed in a similar way as PPARγ in the lung and are mainly enriched in club and AECII cells. To date, the effects of PPARγ-deficiency on the overall peroxisomal compartment and its metabolic alterations in pulmonary club cells are unknown. Therefore, we characterized wild-type and club cell-specific PPARγ knockout-mice lungs and used C22 cells to investigate the peroxisomal compartment and its metabolic roles in the distal airway epithelium by means of 1) double-immunofluorescence labelling for peroxisomal proteins, 2) laser-assisted microdissection of the bronchiolar epithelium and subsequent qRT-PCR, 3) siRNA-transfection of PPARγand PPRE dual-luciferase reporter activity in C22 cells, 4) PPARg inhibition by GW9662, 5) GC-MS based lipid analysis. Our results reveal elevated levels of fatty acids, increased expression of PPARα and PPRE activity, a strong overall upregulation of the peroxisomal compartment and its associated gene expression (biogenesis, α-oxidation, β-oxidation, and plasmalogens) in PPARγ-deficient club cells. Interestingly, catalase was significantly increased and mistargeted into the cytoplasm, suggestive for oxidative stress by the PPARγ-deficiency in club cells. Taken together, PPARα-mediated metabolic induction and proliferation of peroxisomes via a PPRE-dependent mechanism could compensate PPARγ-deficiency in club cells.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".