Search

Previously, S-(1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl)-l-cysteine (TFEC) was shown to mediate cytotoxicity by covalently modifying a well-defined group of intramitochondrial proteins including aconitase, alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase (alphaKGDH) subunits, heat shock protein 60 (HSP60) and mitochondrial HSP70 (mtHSP70). To investigate the cellular responses to this mitochondrial damage, microarray analysis of TFEC treated murine hepatocytes of the TAMH cell line was carried out. Results of these studies revealed a HSP response that was significantly stronger than other well-characterized hepatotoxicants including acetaminophen, diquat and rotenone. Specifically, cytosolic HSP25, HSP40, HSP70, HSP105 and microsomal HSP32 (HO-1) were strongly upregulated within the first few hours of TFEC treatment, while little change was observed among other HSPs that are predominantly localized in the mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Post-translational modification of HSP25 was also observed with the appearance of a unique DTT-resistant immunoreactive band at about 50kDa, a putative dimer. The biological significance of HSP responses to TFEC-induced toxicity were subsequently demonstrated using the "gain of function" pretreatment: heat shock. Overall, we report an atypical HSP induction profile that does not conform to changes expected of a classical temperature shock. Furthermore, despite a well-defined intramitochondrial origin of toxicity, TFEC rapidly evokes an early and strong upregulation of cytosolic stress proteins. The cytoprotective effects of such HSP responses suggest a plausible role in modulating the progression of TFEC-induced cellular injury.

To facilitate collaborative research efforts between multi-investigator teams using DNA microarrays, we identified sources of error and data variability between laboratories and across microarray platforms, and methods to accommodate this variability. RNA expression data were generated in seven laboratories, which compared two standard RNA samples using 12 microarray platforms. At least two standard microarray types (one spotted, one commercial) were used by all laboratories. Reproducibility for most platforms within any laboratory was typically good, but reproducibility between platforms and across laboratories was generally poor. Reproducibility between laboratories increased markedly when standardized protocols were implemented for RNA labeling, hybridization, microarray processing, data acquisition and data normalization. Reproducibility was highest when analysis was based on biological themes defined by enriched Gene Ontology (GO) categories. These findings indicate that microarray results can be comparable across multiple laboratories, especially when a common platform and set of procedures are used.