Back to all available

The Role of RHAU in Hepatic Glucose Homeostasis: A Novel miR-150-Notch3-PPARγ Pathway

biochemistry
cell-biology

Abstract

Background. This study investigates the regulatory role of RHAU (RNA helicase associated with AU-rich elements) on PPARγ (peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ) expression and glucose metabolism in the mouse liver through miR-150.

Methods. Liver-specific Rhau knockout mice (Rhau cko ) were used as a model. The impact of RHAU loss on PPARγ expression, fasting blood glucose levels, and weight was analyzed. Experimental validation and literature review were conducted to explore the interaction between miR-150 and PPARγ, with a focus on the inhibition of Notch3 expression. Bioinformatics analysis was also performed using QGRS to identify a G-quadruplex in pre-miR-150.

Results. The loss of RHAU led to significantly increased PPARγ expression, which resulted in reduced fasting blood glucose levels and weight loss in mice. Overexpression of miR-150 upregulated PPARγ by inhibiting Notch3 expression. Bioinformatics analysis indicated that RHAU unwinds the G-quadruplex structure of pre-miR-150, influencing its maturation.

Conclusion. This study highlights the important role of the RHAU-miR-150-Notch3-PPARγ signaling pathway in liver metabolic regulation and offers new insights into the mechanisms of glucose metabolism.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].