Cited by 18

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of fluoride on PERK-Nrf2 signaling pathway in mouse ameloblasts

Zhou, X, Chen, Z, Zhong, W, Yu, R, He, L·2019·Human & Experimental Toxicology

Abstract

In the development of dental fluorosis, oxidative stress is considered as the key mechanism. Endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress can induce oxidative stress and activate the important antioxidative factor nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) in a PKR-like ER kinase (PERK)-dependent manner, but combining ER stress and oxidative stress, the role of PERK-Nrf2 signaling pathway involved in fluoride-regulated ameloblasts is not fully defined. Here, we studied the effect of fluoride on PERK-Nrf2 signaling pathway in mouse ameloblasts. We found that low-dose and continuous fluoride exposure increased binding immunoglobulin protein expression and activated PERK–activating transcription factor 4 signaling pathway. Meanwhile, the expression of Nrf2 and its target genes (glutamylcysteine synthetase and glutathione S-transferase-P1) enhanced following ER stress. Tunicamycin increased the expression of PERK, leading to Nrf2 nuclear import, and tauroursodeoxycholate suppressed Nrf2 activation through PERK during ER stress, indicating that PERK activation is required for Nrf2 nuclear entry. Furthermore, tert-butylhydroquinone triggered the overexpression of Nrf2 to reduce ER stress, but luteolin inhibited Nrf2 nuclear localization to elevate ER stress. In summary, this study proved that fluoride under certain dose can induce ER stress and promote Nrf2 nuclear import via PERK activation and suggested that antioxidation mechanism mediated by PERK-Nrf2 can alleviate fluoride-induced ER stress effectively.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0960327119842273

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. 10.1016/S0890-6238(02)00038-2 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.toxlet.2013.09.005 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.04.007 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.tiv.2008.09.010 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.cbi.2006.05.018 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.tox.2007.04.007 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.cbi.2010.07.011 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.3748/wjg.v12.i7.1144 · DOI
  9. 10.1111/j.1600-0714.2010.00918.x · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.toxlet.2017.08.018 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.redox.2017.08.014 · DOI
  12. 10.1021/tx3003609 · DOI
  13. 10.1002/mc.20465 · DOI
  14. 10.1074/jbc.R900010200 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1016/j.tox.2010.08.006 · DOI
  16. 10.1101/gad.13.10.1211 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80855-7 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.tcb.2003.11.001 · DOI
  19. 10.1177/1947601910383011 · DOI
  20. 10.1146/annurev.biochem.73.011303.074134 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.biocel.2005.09.018 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1083/jcb.200311055 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1128/MCB.23.20.7198-7209.2003 · DOI
  24. 10.1074/jbc.M314219200 · DOI
  25. 10.1111/j.1755-148X.2010.00731.x · DOI
  26. 10.1152/physiol.00050.2006 · DOI
  27. 10.1074/jbc.M503288200 · DOI
  28. 10.1289/ehp.11375 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/tox.20724 · DOI
  30. 10.1038/nrm3270 · DOI
  31. 10.1186/1756-8722-4-8 · DOI
  32. 10.1007/s12195-013-0272-0 · DOI
  33. 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2004.05.024 · DOI
  34. 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2007.10.055 · DOI
  35. 10.1128/MCB.25.3.1089-1099.2005 · DOI
  36. 10.1074/jbc.M410413200 · DOI
  37. 10.1152/ajpcell.00043.2003 · DOI
  38. 10.1074/jbc.M004037200 · DOI
  39. 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.43.100901.140229 · DOI
  40. Yaari-Stark S, 2010, Int J Cancer, 126, 2268, 10.1002/ijc.25102 · DOI
  41. 10.1096/fj.06-6054com · DOI
  42. 10.1074/jbc.M211898200 · DOI
  43. 10.1074/jbc.M211558200 · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2013.08.002 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zhou, X., Chen, Z., Zhong, W., Yu, R., & He, L.
Affiliations
  • Department of Dental Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, Guangzhou, China
  • Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, Guangzhou, China
ORCID
Yu, R
Venue
Human & Experimental Toxicology
Published
2019-04-12
Volume
38
Issue
7
Pages
833-845
ISSN
  • 0960-3271
  • 1477-0903
Cited by
18
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review