BioGPS
  • Home
  • Help
  • Plugins
  • Datasets
  • Sign Up
  • Login
Examples: Gene Symbol(s), Gene Ontology, Splicing plugins, Melanoma datasets
advanced
Home › Dataset Library › The eIF2 kinase PERK and the integrated stress response facilitate activation of ATF6 during endoplasmic reticulum stress

Dataset: The eIF2 kinase PERK and the integrated stress response facilitate activation of ATF6 during endoplasmic reticulum stress

Disruptions of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) that perturb protein folding cause ER stress and elicit an unfolded protein response (UPR)...

Registered by ArrayExpress Uploader
View Dataset

Disruptions of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) that perturb protein folding cause ER stress and elicit an unfolded protein response (UPR) that involves translational and transcriptional changes in gene expression aimed at expanding the ER processing capacity and alleviating cellular injury. Three ER stress sensors PERK, ATF6, and IRE1 implement the UPR. PERK phosphorylation of eIF2 during ER stress represses protein synthesis, which prevents further influx of ER client proteins, along with preferential translation of ATF4, a transcription activator of the integrated stress response. In this study we show that the PERK/eIF2α~P/ATF4 pathway is required not only for translational control, but also activation of ATF6 and its target genes. The PERK pathway facilitates both the synthesis of ATF6 and trafficking of ATF6 from the ER to the Golgi for intramembrane proteolysis and activation of ATF6. As a consequence, liver-specific depletion of PERK significantly reduces both the translational and transcriptional phases of the UPR, leading to reduced protein chaperone expression, disruptions of lipid metabolism, and enhanced apoptosis. These findings show that the regulatory networks of the UPR are fully integrated, and helps explain the diverse pathologies associated with loss of PERK. 14 gene expression arrays, 3 WT control arrays; 3 lsPERK control arrays; 4 WT Treated arrays; 4 lsPERK treated arrays. Comparison of gene expression profiles for treated vs control in wildtype and knock-out.

Species:
mouse

Samples:
14

Source:
E-GEOD-29929

PubMed:
21917591

Updated:
Dec.12, 2014

Registered:
Nov.11, 2014


Factors: (via ArrayExpress)
Sample TREATMENT VARIATION RESPONSE TO TREATMENT
GSM740952 1mg/kg Tunicamycin WT ER stress
GSM740952 1mg/kg Tunicamycin WT ER stress
GSM740952 1mg/kg Tunicamycin WT ER stress
GSM740952 1mg/kg Tunicamycin WT ER stress
GSM740956 0.3% DMSO WT control
GSM740956 0.3% DMSO WT control
GSM740956 0.3% DMSO WT control
GSM740959 1mg/kg Tunicamycin lsPERK ER stress
GSM740959 1mg/kg Tunicamycin lsPERK ER stress
GSM740959 1mg/kg Tunicamycin lsPERK ER stress
GSM740959 1mg/kg Tunicamycin lsPERK ER stress
GSM740963 0.3% DMSO lsPERK control
GSM740963 0.3% DMSO lsPERK control
GSM740963 0.3% DMSO lsPERK control

Tags

  • endoplasmic reticulum
  • lipid
  • liver
  • protein

Other Formats

JSON    XML
  • About
  • Blog
  • Help
  • FAQ
  • Downloads
  • API
  • iPhone App
  • Email updates
© 2025 The Scripps Research Institute. All rights reserved. (ver 94eefe6 )
  • Terms of Use