Next Article in Journal
Role of Noradrenaline and Adrenoreceptors in Regulating Prostaglandin E2 Synthesis Cascade in Inflamed Endometrium of Pigs
Previous Article in Journal
ARID1A, NOTCH and WNT Signature in Gynaecological Tumours
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 6
10.3390/ijms24065855
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of GRP78 on Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Inflammatory Response in Macrophages of Large Yellow Croaker (Larimichthys crocea)

by
Jie Sun
1,
Kangsen Mai
1,2 and
Qinghui Ai
1,2,*
1
Key Laboratory of Aquaculture Nutrition and Feed (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs), Key Laboratory of Mariculture (Ministry of Education), Ocean University of China, 5 Yushan Road, Qingdao 266003, China
2
Laboratory for Marine Fisheries Science and Food Production Processes, Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, 1 Wenhai Road, Qingdao 266237, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(6), 5855; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24065855
Submission received: 7 February 2023 / Revised: 5 March 2023 / Accepted: 7 March 2023 / Published: 20 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Molecular Immunology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Endoplasmic reticulum (ER) homeostasis plays a vital role in cell physiological functions. Various factors can destroy the homeostasis of the ER and cause ER stress. Moreover, ER stress is often related to inflammation. Glucose-regulated protein 78 (GRP78) is an ER chaperone, which plays a vital role in maintaining cellular homeostasis. Nevertheless, the potential effects of GRP78 on ER stress and inflammation is still not fully elucidated in fish. In the present study, ER stress and inflammation was induced by tunicamycin (TM) or palmitic acid (PA) in the macrophages of large yellow croakers. GRP78 was treated with an agonist/inhibitor before or after the TM/PA treatment. The results showed that the TM/PA treatment could significantly induce ER stress and an inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers whereas the incubation of the GRP78 agonist could reduce TM/PA-induced ER stress and an inflammatory response. Moreover, the incubation of the GRP78 inhibitor could further induce TM/PA-induced ER stress and an inflammatory response. These results provide an innovative idea to explain the relationship between GRP78 and TM/PA-induced ER stress or inflammation in large yellow croakers.

1. Introduction

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is essential for regulating calcium storage, protein folding, and the biosynthesis of lipids, steroids, and carbohydrates [1,2]. Cellular stress conditions such as exposure to free radicals, a glucose deficiency, and the accumulation of misfolded or unfolded proteins can cause ER stress and activate an unfolded protein response (UPR) [3,4,5,6]. One of the most essential protective mechanisms induced by the UPR is the upregulation of the expression of glucose-regulated protein 78 (GRP78).
GRP78 is also commonly referred to as BiP, the immunoglobulin heavy chain binding protein, which belongs to the heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) family. In non-stressed cells, GRP78 is bound to all three UPR transmembrane stress sensors, which are maintained in an inactive state, including double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase-like ER kinase (PERK), activating transcription factor 6 (ATF6), and inositol-requiring protein 1α (IRE1α). Upon ER stress, all three sensors become active after being released from GRP78. The UPR active form then downregulates the translation of protein and increases the correct folding [7].
All three UPR sensors have been found to regulate the inflammatory response [8,9,10,11]; for example, to activate TNFα and NF-κB. GRP78 also has been found to regulate inflammation. GRP78 is known as part of the resolution-associated molecular patterns (RAMPs) family that can be anti-inflammatory and promote the resolution of inflammation [12,13,14]. GRP78 regulates FAT10 expression by modulating the NF-κB pathway; to be more specific, the activation of the NF-κB pathway can increase the expression of FAT10, which is a gene counteracting the tumor suppressor p53 [15]. An antibody directly against the GRP78 carboxyl terminal domain can inhibit the pro-proliferative NF-κB signaling cascade in cancer cells [16].
Tunicamycin (TM) is a common ER stress inducer. In previous studies, the results showed that TM incubation could significantly induce ER stress-related genes [17,18,19,20]. Meanwhile, a TM treatment has often induced the expression of proinflammatory genes [19,21,22,23]. Palmitic acid (PA) is known as one of the most common saturated fatty acids, which has also been demonstrated to induce the inflammation of macrophages in mammals [24]. Palm oil (PO) is enriched with PA and is widely used as a substitute for fish oil in aquaculture [25]. Previous studies have shown that the overuse of PO often induces inflammation [26,27]; meanwhile, PA has been revealed to induce inflammation and ER stress [28,29,30]. However, the relationship between GRP78 and TM/PA-induced inflammation or ER stress is still not completely understood.
Although fish are less evolved than mammals, their immune response system and nutrient-sensing are evolutionarily conservative [31]. The large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea) is a vital fish-farming species in China. In recent years, PO has been widely used in large yellow croaker feed as a promising alternative to fish oil. The large yellow croaker can be used as a terrific experimental model animal. Hence, this study aimed to discover how GRP78 mediates ER stress and the inflammatory response in large yellow croakers. This study may develop an understanding of the molecular mechanism of ER stress and the inflammatory response mediated by GRP78.

2. Results

2.1. TM Treatment Induces ER Stress and an Inflammatory Response in the Macrophages of Large Yellow Croakers

The results indicated that TM incubation for different time points significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the control group (p < 0.05) (Figure 1A). Additionally, the protein levels of XBP1s and GRP78 as well as the phosphorylation levels of PERK and eif2α were significantly higher than those in the control group (Figure 1B) whereas the protein level of CHOP was not remarkably different. We then analyzed the effect of ER stress on inflammation in the macrophages. TM incubation significantly increased the mRNA levels of proinflammatory genes, including il-8, il-6, il-1β, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ (p < 0.05) (Figure 1C). Moreover, TM incubation significantly upregulated the phosphorylation levels of JNK, ERK, and p38 (Figure 1B). These results demonstrated that the TM treatment could induce ER stress and an inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers.

2.2. BiP Inducer X (GRP78 Agonist) Treatment Induces ER Stress and an Inflammatory Response in Macrophages

The results showed that BiP inducer X (BiP) treatments at different concentrations significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78 at 4 h and 8 h; however, at 12 h, only the 10 μM BiP incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78 (p < 0.05) (Figure 2A). Moreover, the BiP treatments for different concentrations at 4 h significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the control group (p < 0.05) (Figure 2B). Additionally, the 10 μM BiP incubation for 4 h and 8 h significantly upregulated the protein levels of XBP1s and GRP78, and at 4 h significantly upregulated the phosphorylation levels of eif2α (p < 0.05) (Figure 2D). Different concentrations of the BiP treatment for 4 h significantly increased the mRNA levels of proinflammatory genes, including il-6, il-1β, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ (p < 0.05) (Figure 2C). Furthermore, BiP incubation significantly upregulated the phosphorylation levels of JNK, ERK, and p38 (p < 0.05) (Figure 2D). These results indicated that the BiP treatment could induce ER stress and an inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers.

2.3. HM03 (GRP78 Inhibitor) Treatment Induces ER Stress and an Inflammatory Response in Macrophages

The results indicated that HM03 incubations for different concentrations significantly decreased the mRNA level of grp78 at 3 h and 5 h (p < 0.05) (Figure 3A). HM03 incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the control group (p < 0.05) (Figure 3A). Additionally, the 10 μM HM03 incubation for 5 h significantly decreased the protein level of GRP78 (p < 0.05) (Figure 3C). Moreover, HM03 incubation significantly decreased the protein level of XBP1s and upregulated the phosphorylation level of eif2α at 3 h (p < 0.05) (Figure 3C). The 10 μM HM03 incubation significantly increased the mRNA levels of proinflammatory genes, including il-1β, il-6, il-8, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ (p < 0.05) (Figure 3B). Furthermore, HM03 incubation significantly upregulated the phosphorylation levels of JNK, ERK, and p38 (p < 0.05) (Figure 3C). These results demonstrated that the HM03 treatment could induce ER stress and an inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers.

2.4. Effect of GRP78 on TM-Induced ER Stress and Inflammation in Macrophages

To confirm the effect of GRP78 on TM-induced ER stress and inflammation, 10 μM BiP and HM03 were incubated for 4 h before or after 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h. The results showed that the BiP treatment before TM incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the TM treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 4A). Moreover, the proinflammatory genes, including il-6, il-1β, cox2, and ifnγ, were significantly increased (p < 0.05) (Figure 4B). BiP incubation significantly upregulated the phosphorylation level of ERK (p < 0.05) (Figure 4C). The BiP treatment after TM incubation significantly downregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1s, atf4, and atf6 compared with the TM treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 5A). Additionally, the proinflammatory genes, including il-8 and il-1β, were significantly downregulated (p < 0.05) (Figure 5B). Furthermore, the phosphorylation levels of JNK and ERK were significantly decreased (p < 0.05) (Figure 5C). The HM03 treatment before TM incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the TM treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 6A). Moreover, the proinflammatory genes, including il-6, il-1β, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ, were significantly increased (p < 0.05) (Figure 6B). Additionally, the protein level of XBP1s and the phosphorylation levels of JNK, ERK, and eif2α were significantly upregulated (p < 0.05) (Figure 6C). The HM03 treatment after TM incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, xbp1s, chop, and atf4 compared with the TM treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 7A). Moreover, the proinflammatory genes, including il-1β, cox2, ifnγ, and tnfα, were significantly upregulated (p < 0.05) (Figure 7B). Furthermore, the phosphorylation level of JNK was significantly increased (p < 0.05) (Figure 7C). These results demonstrated that the BiP treatment after TM incubation could reduce the TM-induced ER stress and inflammatory response whereas the HM03 treatment could further induce the TM-induced ER stress and inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers.

2.5. PA Treatment Induces ER Stress and an Inflammatory Response in Macrophages

The results indicated that PA incubation for different time points significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the control group (p < 0.05) (Figure 8A). Additionally, the protein levels of XBP1s and GRP78 were significantly upregulated compared with those in the control group (Figure 8B). Moreover, PA incubation significantly increased the mRNA levels of proinflammatory genes, including il-1β, il-6, il-8, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ (p < 0.05) (Figure 8C). Furthermore, PA incubation significantly upregulated the phosphorylation levels of JNK and ERK (Figure 8B). These results indicated that the PA treatment could induce ER stress and an inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers.

2.6. Effect of GRP78 on PA-Induced ER Stress and Inflammation in Macrophages

To confirm the effect of GRP78 on PA-induced ER stress and inflammation, 10 μM BiP and HM03 were incubated for 4 h before or after 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h. The results showed that the BiP treatment before PA incubation significantly downregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the PA treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 9A). Moreover, the proinflammatory genes, including tnfα and ifnγ, were significantly decreased (p < 0.05) (Figure 9B). The BiP treatment after PA incubation significantly downregulated the mRNA expression of xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the PA treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 10A). Furthermore, the proinflammatory genes, including il-8, cox2, and tnfα, were significantly downregulated (p < 0.05) (Figure 10B). The HM03 treatment before PA incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, chop, and atf4 compared with the PA treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 11A). Moreover, the proinflammatory genes, including il-8, il-6, il-1β, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ, were significantly upregulated (p < 0.05) (Figure 11B). The HM03 treatment after PA incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of grp78, xbp1, chop, and atf4 compared with the PA treatment group (p < 0.05) (Figure 12A). Additionally, the proinflammatory genes, including il-8, il-6, il-1β, cox2, tnfα, and ifnγ, were significantly upregulated (p < 0.05) (Figure 12B). These results demonstrated that the BiP treatment could reduce the PA-induced ER stress and inflammatory response whereas the HM03 treatment could further induce the PA-induced ER stress and inflammatory response in the macrophages of large yellow croakers.

3. Discussion

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is the central organelle of the secretory pathways, which is the major place for synthesizing and exporting both lipids and proteins [32]. However, misfolded/unfolded proteins accumulate in the ER lumen, causing ER stress [33], which is a defense system for dealing with that situation. Previous studies have shown that ER stress is usually related to the inflammatory response [34,35]. Tunicamycin (TM) is a mixture of homologous nucleoside antibiotics, which can cause unfolded proteins to accumulate in the ER and induce ER stress. In the present study, TM incubation could significantly induce the expression of ER stress-related genes and proteins, which was consistent with previous studies [17,18,19,20]. Meanwhile, similar to previous studies [19,21,22,23], the TM treatment induced the expression of proinflammatory genes.
In this study, the data indicated that palmitic acid (PA) incubation increased ER stress, which was consistent with previous studies in mammals [36,37,38]. PA induces ER stress by increasing the content of saturated ER membrane phospholipids [39], perturbing ER calcium homeostasis [40] and modulating protein folding [41]. Furthermore, the PA treatment induced an inflammatory response, which was consistent with previous studies [24,27,28,29,30]. A study reported that dietary palm oil that contained a high level of PA could increase the inflammatory response by activating the TLR–NF-κB pathway [27]. Zhang [29] demonstrated that the IRE1α–XBP1s signaling pathway participated in PA-induced inflammation. Moreover, a previous study showed that PA induced inflammation via the TLR22–MAPK–PPARγ/Nrf2 pathway [30].
In order to figure out the relationship between glucose-regulated protein 78 (GRP78) and TM/PA-induced ER stress or inflammation, we used a GRP78 agonist (BiP inducer X) or inhibitor (HM03). In the present study, BiP inducer X (BiP) significantly upregulated the expression of GRP78 mRNA and the protein level. Similar to a previous study that observed that the rise of GRP78 mRNA by BiP was transient, the treatment for 4 h reached a peak, but the levels of GRP78 protein continued to upregulate up to 12 h [42]. Meanwhile, the BiP treatment increased the expression of ER stress-related genes and proteins, which was different from a previous study [42]. To be more specific, in that previous study, BiP preferentially increased GRP78 and slightly induced CHOP, calreticulin, and GRP94 mediated by the ATF6 pathway; however, BiP did not affect XBP1 or eif2α [42]. HM03 significantly decreased the GRP78 mRNA and protein levels; furthermore, the HM03 treatment increased the expression of ER stress-related genes.
In the present study, the BiP treatment after TM/PA incubation significantly decreased ER stress-related genes such as xbp1s, atf6, and atf4 compared with the TM/PA treatment group. Consistent with previous studies that BiP is an effective ER stress inhibitor [43], BiP is known to significantly downregulate ER stress through an induced GRP78 mRNA level in animal models and in various cell lines [42,43,44,45]. Previous studies have indicated that the overexpression of GRP78 can reduce ER stress and increase thermogenesis [46]; moreover, the genetic overexpression of GRP78 was competent to reduce ER stress and to revert the metabolic and obese phenotype [47]. The results of the BiP treatment before PA incubation was consistent with the post-treatment of BiP. However, the BiP treatment before TM incubation significantly upregulated the mRNA expression of xbp1, xbp1s, chop, atf6, and atf4 compared with the TM treatment group. These results may be because the BiP treatment could significantly increase ER stress-related genes, then TM incubation after the BiP treatment further induced the gene expression. Different from that under TM-induced ER stress, the overexpression of GRP78 through the BiP treatment could alleviate ER stress. These results also suggested that ER stress and inflammation induced by TM and PA were different. The HM03 treatment before or after TM/PA incubation significantly induced the expression of ER stress-related genes. Previous studies have shown that GRP78 siRNA increased the expression of UPR-induced genes such as chop [48]. An electron-microscopic analysis of the structure of intracellular organelles showed that the ER was greatly disorganized and expanded in the cells where GRP78 was downregulated [49]; in the cells where the GRP78 expression was downregulated by siRNA, the UPR pathways were activated.
Furthermore, the results from the present study indicated that the inflammatory response under different treatments was consistent with the ER stress response. GRP78 has been indicated to be anti-inflammatory and promote the resolution of inflammation [12,13,14]. A previous study revealed that GRP78 mediated the endocytosis of TLR4 by targeting CD14, which is conducive to the regression of an inflammatory response [13]. Moreover, an adoptive GRP78–DC transfer was essential to resolve the inflammatory response in NOD mice [14]. The results suggested that the inflammatory response may be regulated by GRP78 on the one hand and be regulated by ER stress on the other hand.
In conclusion, we found that GRP78 could regulate TM/PA-induced ER stress or inflammation. To be more specific, the overexpression of GRP78 could reduce the TM/PA-induced ER stress and inflammatory response. These results provide a novel idea to explain the relationship between GRP78 and TM/PA-induced ER stress or inflammation in large yellow croakers.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Cell Culture and Treatment

The macrophage line of large yellow croakers was obtained from our colleagues [50]. The macrophages were seeded into 6-well plates at a density of 2.0 × 106 cells/well and were maintained in a DMEM/F12 medium (BI, Kibbutz Beit-Haemek, Israel) containing 15% FBS (BI, Kibbutz Beit-Haemek, Israel) and antibiotics (Solarbio, Beijing, China) in a 5% CO2 atmosphere at 28 °C. To figure out the effects of TM on ER stress and the inflammatory response in the macrophages, the cells were incubated with 1 μM TM for different time points. The control group was treated with DMSO of the same concentration (Solarbio, Beijing, China). The cells were incubated with PA to confirm the effects of PA on ER stress and the inflammatory response in the macrophages. PA (Sigma, St. Louis, MO, USA) was supplemented to the cells with the forms of BSA/fatty acid complexes at 500 μM for different time points. The solvent group was set as the control group. To investigate the role of GRP78 in TM/PA-induced ER stress and the inflammatory response, a GRP78 agonist (BiP inducer X; MCE, Jersey City, NJ, USA) and a GRP78 inhibitor (HM03; MCE, Jersey City, NJ, USA) were treated with a concentration of 10 μM for 4 h before or after the TM/PA treatment. After incubation, the cells were lysed in the wells and harvested for the further analysis.

4.2. RNA Extraction and RT-qPCR

The harvested macrophage cells were added to a Trizol reagent (Takara, Dalian, China). The total RNA was then extracted according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The quality of RNA was detected by electrophoresis using 1.2% denatured agarose gel. The RNA was reversed to cDNA by a PrimeScript RT reagent kit (Takara, Dalian, China) following the manufacturer’s protocol. The mRNA expression levels were quantified in a quantitative thermal cycler (Bio-rad, Hercules, CA, USA) with an SYBR Green real-time PCR kit (Takara, Dalian, China). The normalization of the gene expression in different tissues of large yellow croakers was detected by rpl17, gapdh, and β-actin to test their suitability. Among all treatments, no significant differences in β-actin expression were detected, suggesting that β-actin could be used as a reference gene. Further, the mRNA expression of each gene was normalized to that of β-actin using the 2−ΔΔct method [51].

4.3. Western Blot

Western blotting was carried out following the methods in previous studies [30,52,53]. The primary antibodies against JNK1/2 (Cat. No. 9252), p-JNK1/2 (Cat. No. 4668), ERK1/2 (Cat. No. 4695), p-ERK1/2 (Cat. No. 4370), p-p38 (Cat. No. 9215), GRP78 (Cat. No. 3177), XBP1s (Cat. No. 12782), PERK (Cat. No. 5683), p-eif2α (Cat. No. 9721), eif2α (Cat. No. 9722), and CHOP (Cat. No. 5554) were purchased from Cell Signaling Technology (Boston, MA, USA). The antibody against p-PERK (Cat. No. abs137056) was purchased from Absin Biotechnology (China). GAPDH (AF1186) and HRP-conjugated secondary antibodies (A0208) were obtained from Beyotime. The target proteins were quantified using ImageJ software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA).

4.4. Statistical Analysis

All data were presented as means ± SEM. All data were subjected to independent t-tests with the help of SPSS 19.0. A p < 0.05 was applied as a significant difference and a p < 0.01 as a highly significant difference.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.S., K.M. and Q.A.; formal analysis, J.S.; data curation, J.S.; writing—original draft preparation, J.S.; writing—review and editing, J.S. and Q.A.; supervision, Q.A.; funding acquisition, Q.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Scientific and Technological Innovation of Blue Granary (grant no. 2018YFD0900402), the Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 31830103), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Shan Dong) (grant no. U2106232).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

We thank Weiwei Dai for his valuable suggestions for the design of this experiment. We also thank Fan Chen, Weijia Li, Qiuxin Yan, Zhihao Zhang, and Ting Xu for their experimental assistance. We appreciate Qiuchi Chen, Dan Xu, and Jiamin Li for providing antibodies.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kozutsumi, Y.; Segal, M.; Normington, K.; Gething, M.J.; Sambrook, J. The presence of malfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum signals the induction of glucose-regulated proteins. Nature 1988, 332, 462–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Høyer-Hansen, M.; Jäättelä, M.J.C.D. Connecting endoplasmic reticulum stress to autophagy by unfolded protein response and calcium. Cell Death Differ. 2007, 14, 1576–1582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hendershot, M. The Unfolding Tale of the Unfolded Protein Response. Cell 2001, 107, 827–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ron, D.; Walter, P. Signal integration in the endoplasmic reticulum unfolded protein response. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2007, 8, 519–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bertolotti, A.; Zhang, Y.; Hendershot, L.M.; Harding, H.P.; Ron, D. Dynamic interaction of BiP and ER stress transducers in the unfolded-protein response. Nat. Cell Biol. 2000, 2, 326–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Sun, L.; Zhao, Y.; Zhou, K.; Freeze, H.H.; Xu, H. Insufficient ER-stress response causes selective mouse cerebellar granule cell degeneration resembling that seen in congenital disorders of glycosylation. Mol. Brain 2013, 6, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Pfaffenbach, K.T.; Lee, A.S. The critical role of GRP78 in physiologic and pathologic stress. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2011, 23, 150–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Urano, F. Coupling of Stress in the ER to Activation of JNK Protein Kinases by Transmembrane Protein Kinase IRE1. Science 2000, 287, 664–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Hu, P.; Han, Z.; Couvillon, A.D.; Kaufman, R.J.; Exton, J.H. Autocrine tumor necrosis factor alpha links endoplasmic reticulum stress to the membrane death receptor pathway through IRE1 alpha-mediated NF-kappa B activation and down-regulation of TRAF2 expression. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2006, 26, 3071–3084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Deng, J.; Lu, P.D.; Zhang, Y.; Scheuner, D.; Kaufman, R.J.; Sonenberg, N.; Harding, H.P.; Ron, D. Translational Repression Mediates Activation of Nuclear Factor Kappa B by Phosphorylated Translation Initiation Factor 2. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2004, 24, 10161–10168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Yamazaki, H.; Hiramatsu, N.; Hayakawa, K.; Tagawa, Y.; Okamura, M.; Ogata, R.; Huang, T.; Nakajima, S.; Yao, J.; Paton, A.W.; et al. Activation of the Akt-NF-kappaB pathway by subtilase cytotoxin through the ATF6 branch of the unfolded protein response. J. Immunol. (1950) 2009, 183, 1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Shields, A.M.; Panayi, G.S.; Corrigall, V.M. Resolution-associated molecular patterns (RAMP): RAMParts defending immunological homeostasis? Clin. Exp. Immunol. 2011, 165, 292–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Qin, K.; Ma, S.; Li, H.; Wu, M.; Sun, Y.; Fu, M.; Guo, Z.; Zhu, H.; Gong, F.; Lei, P.; et al. GRP78 Impairs Production of Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Cytokines by Interaction with CD14. Front. Immunol. 2017, 8, 579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Zhou, X.; Yang, M.; Lv, Y.; Li, H.; Wu, S.; Min, J.; Shen, G.; He, Y.; Lei, P. Adoptive transfer of GRP78-treated dendritic cells alleviates insulitis in NOD mice. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2021, 110, 1023–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Luo, C.; Xiong, H.; Chen, L.; Liu, X.; Zou, S.; Guan, J.; Wang, K. GRP78 Promotes Hepatocellular Carcinoma proliferation by increasing FAT10 expression through the NF-κB pathway. Exp. Cell Res. 2018, 365, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Misra, U.K.; Kaczowka, S.; Pizzo, S.V. Inhibition of NF-κB1 and NF-κB2 activation in prostate cancer cells treated with antibody against the carboxyl terminal domain of GRP78: Effect of p53 upregulation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2010, 392, 538–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Natsume, Y.; Ito, S.; Satsu, H.; Shimizu, M. Protective effect of quercetin on ER stress caused by calcium dynamics dysregulation in intestinal epithelial cells. Toxicology 2009, 258, 164–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Abdullahi, A.; Stanojcic, M.; Parousis, A.; Patsouris, D.; Jeschke, M.G. Modeling Acute ER Stress In Vivo and In Vitro. Shock 2017, 47, 506–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Fang, W.; Chen, Q.; Li, J.; Liu, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Shen, Y.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Disturbs Lipid Homeostasis and Augments Inflammation in the Intestine and Isolated Intestinal Cells of Large Yellow Croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Front. Immunol. 2021, 12, 738143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chen, Q.; Fang, W.; Cui, K.; Chen, Q.; Xiang, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Endoplasmic reticulum stress induces hepatic steatosis by transcriptional upregulating lipid droplet protein perilipin2. FASEB J. 2021, 35, e21900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Guo, Q.; Li, H.; Liu, J.; Xu, L.; Yang, L.; Sun, Z.; Zhou, B. Tunicamycin aggravates endoplasmic reticulum stress and airway inflammation via PERK-ATF4-CHOP signaling in a murine model of neutrophilic asthma. J. Asthma 2017, 54, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Ren, F.; Zhou, L.; Zhang, X.; Wen, T.; Shi, H.; Xie, B.; Li, Z.; Chen, D.; Wang, Z.; Duan, Z. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress-Activated Glycogen Synthase Kinase 3 beta Aggravates Liver Inflammation and Hepatotoxicity in Mice with Acute Liver Failure. Inflammation 2015, 38, 1151–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Mondal, A.K.; Das, S.K.; Varma, V.; Nolen, G.T.; McGehee, R.E.; Elbein, S.C.; Wei, J.Y.; Ranganathan, G. Effect of endoplasmic reticulum stress on inflammation and adiponectin regulation in human adipocytes. Metab. Syndr. Relat. Disord. 2012, 10, 297–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Korbecki, J.B.R.K. The effect of palmitic acid on inflammatory response in macrophages: An overview of molecular mechanisms. Inflamm. Res. Off. J. Eur. Histamine Res. Soc. 2019, 68, 915–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Bell, J.G.; Henderson, R.J.; Tocher, D.R.; Mcghee, F.; Dick, J.R.; Porter, A.; Smullen, R.P.; Sargent, J.R. Substituting fish oil with crude palm oil in the diet of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) affects muscle fatty acid composition and hepatic fatty acid metabolism. J. Nutr. 2002, 132, 222–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Bahurmiz, O.M.; Ng, W.K. Effects of dietary palm oil source on growth, tissue fatty acid composition and nutrient digestibility of red hybrid tilapia, Oreochromis sp., raised from stocking to marketable size. Aquaculture 2007, 262, 382–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Li, X.; Ji, R.; Cui, K.; Chen, Q.; Chen, Q.; Fang, W.; Mai, K.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, W.; Ai, Q. High percentage of dietary palm oil suppressed growth and antioxidant capacity and induced the inflammation by activation of TLR NF-κB signaling pathway in large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2019, 87, 600–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Fang, W.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Q.; Xu, D.; Liu, Q.; Cao, X.; Hao, T.; Zhang, L.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Palmitic acid induces intestinal lipid metabolism disorder, endoplasmic reticulum stress and inflammation by affecting phosphatidylethanolamine content in large yellow croaker Larimichthys crocea. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 984508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhang, J.; Liu, Q.; Pang, Y.; Xu, X.; Cui, K.; Zhang, Y.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Molecular cloning and the involvement of IRE1α-XBP1s signaling pathway in palmitic acid induced—Inflammation in primary hepatocytes from large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2020, 98, 112–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Xu, D.; Cui, K.; Li, Q.; Zhu, S.; Zhang, J.; Gao, S.; Hao, T.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Docosahexaenoic Acid Alleviates Palmitic Acid-Induced Inflammation of Macrophages via TLR22-MAPK-PPARγ/Nrf2 Pathway in Large Yellow Croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Antioxidants 2022, 11, 682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hotamisligil, G.S. Inflammation and metabolic disorders. Nature 2006, 444, 860–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gillon, A.D.; Latham, C.F.; Miller, E.A. Vesicle-mediated ER export of proteins and lipids. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2012, 1821, 1040–1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Guzel, E.; Arlier, S.; Guzeloglu-Kayisli, O.; Tabak, M.S.; Ekiz, T.; Semerci, N.; Larsen, K.; Schatz, F.; Lockwood, C.J.; Kayisli, U.A. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Homeostasis in Reproductive Physiology and Pathology. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Puri, P.; Mirshahi, F.; Cheung, O.; Natarajan, R.; Maher, J.W.; Kellum, J.M.; Sanyal, A.J. Activation and Dysregulation of the Unfolded Protein Response in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Gastroenterology 2008, 134, 568–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Malhi, H.; Kaufman, R.J. Endoplasmic reticulum stress in liver disease. J. Hepatol. 2011, 54, 795–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Wei, Y.; Wang, D.; Topczewski, F.; Pagliassotti, M.J. Saturated fatty acids induce endoplasmic reticulum stress and apoptosis independently of ceramide in liver cells. Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab. 2006, 291, E275–E281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Borradaile, N.M.; Han, X.; Harp, J.D.; Gale, S.E.; Ory, D.S.; Schaffer, J.E. Disruption of endoplasmic reticulum structure and integrity in lipotoxic cell death. J. Lipid Res. 2006, 47, 2726–2737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Yang, L.; Guan, G.; Lei, L.; Lv, Q.; Liu, S.; Zhan, X.; Jiang, Z.; Gu, X. Palmitic acid induces human osteoblast-like Saos-2 cell apoptosis via endoplasmic reticulum stress and autophagy. Cell Stress Chaperones 2018, 23, 1283–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ariyama, H.; Kono, N.; Matsuda, S.; Inoue, T.; Arai, H. Decrease in Membrane Phospholipid Unsaturation Induces Unfolded Protein Response*. J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285, 22027–22035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Fu, S.; Yang, L.; Li, P.; Hofmann, O.; Dicker, L.; Hide, W.; Lin, X.; Watkins, S.M.; Ivanov, A.R.; Hotamisligil, G.S. Aberrant lipid metabolism disrupts calcium homeostasis causing liver endoplasmic reticulum stress in obesity. Nature 2011, 473, 528–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Volmer, R.; Ron, D. Lipid-dependent regulation of the unfolded protein response. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2015, 33, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Kudo, T.; Kanemoto, S.; Hara, H.; Morimoto, N.; Morihara, T.; Kimura, R.; Tabira, T.; Imaizumi, K.; Takeda, M. A molecular chaperone inducer protects neurons from ER stress. Cell Death Differ. 2008, 15, 364–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Ha, T.K.; Hansen, A.H.; Kildegaard, H.F.; Lee, G.M. BiP Inducer X: An ER Stress Inhibitor for Enhancing Recombinant Antibody Production in CHO Cell Culture. Biotechnol. J. 2019, 14, e1900130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Inokuchi, Y.; Nakajima, Y.; Shimazawa, M.; Kurita, T.; Kubo, M.; Saito, A.; Sajiki, H.; Kudo, T.; Aihara, M.; Imaizumi, K.; et al. Effect of an Inducer of BiP, a Molecular Chaperone, on Endoplasmic Reticulum (ER) Stress-Induced Retinal Cell Death. Investig. Opthalmology Vis. Sci. 2009, 50, 334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Oida, Y.; Izuta, H.; Oyagi, A.; Shimazawa, M.; Kudo, T.; Imaizumi, K.; Hara, H. Induction of BiP, an ER-resident protein, prevents the neuronal death induced by transient forebrain ischemia in gerbil. Brain Res. 2008, 1208, 217–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Contreras, C.; González-García, I.; Martínez-Sánchez, N.; Seoane-Collazo, P.; Jacas, J.; Morgan, D.A.; Serra, D.; Gallego, R.; Gonzalez, F.; Casals, N.; et al. Central Ceramide-Induced Hypothalamic Lipotoxicity and ER Stress Regulate Energy Balance. Cell Rep. 2014, 9, 366–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Contreras, C.; Gonzalez-Garcia, I.; Seoane-Collazo, P.; Martinez-Sanchez, N.; Linares-Pose, L.; Rial-Pensado, E.; Ferno, J.; Tena-Sempere, M.; Casals, N.; Dieguez, C.; et al. Reduction of Hypothalamic Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress Activates Browning of White Fat and Ameliorates Obesity. Diabetes 2017, 66, 87–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Suzuki, T.; Lu, J.; Zahed, M.; Kita, K.; Suzuki, N. Reduction of GRP78 expression with siRNA activates unfolded protein response leading to apoptosis in HeLa cells. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2007, 468, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Li, J.; Ni, M.; Lee, B.; Barron, E.; Hinton, D.R.; Lee, A.S. The unfolded protein response regulator GRP78/BiP is required for endoplasmic reticulum integrity and stress-induced autophagy in mammalian cells. Cell Death Differ. 2008, 15, 1460–1471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Cui, K.; Li, Q.; Xu, D.; Zhang, J.; Gao, S.; Xu, W.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Establishment and characterization of two head kidney macrophage cell lines from large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2020, 102, 103477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Livak, K.J.; Schmittgen, T.D.L. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2-ΔΔct method. Methods 2001, 25, 402–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Liu, Z.; Gan, L.; Liu, G.; Chen, Y.; Wu, T.; Feng, F.; Sun, C. Sirt1 decreased adipose inflammation by interacting with Akt2 and inhibiting mTOR/S6K1 pathway in mice. J. Lipid Res. 2016, 57, 1373–1381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Wang, X.; He, G.; Mai, K.; Xu, W.; Zhou, H. Differential regulation of taurine biosynthesis in rainbow trout and Japanese flounder. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 21231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Ijms 24 05855 g001 550
Figure 1. Effects of 1 μM TM treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after TM treatment for different time points. (B) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after TM treatment for different time points. (C) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after TM treatment for different time points. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 1. Effects of 1 μM TM treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after TM treatment for different time points. (B) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after TM treatment for different time points. (C) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after TM treatment for different time points. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g001
Ijms 24 05855 g002 550
Figure 2. Effects of GRP78 agonist (BiP inducer X (BiP)) treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of GRP78 after BiP treatment for different time points with different concentrations. (B) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after BiP treatment for 4 h with different concentrations. (C) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after BiP treatment for 4 h with different concentrations. (D) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h and 8 h. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 2. Effects of GRP78 agonist (BiP inducer X (BiP)) treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of GRP78 after BiP treatment for different time points with different concentrations. (B) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after BiP treatment for 4 h with different concentrations. (C) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after BiP treatment for 4 h with different concentrations. (D) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h and 8 h. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g002
Ijms 24 05855 g003 550
Figure 3. Effects of GRP78 inhibitor (HM03) treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after HM03 treatment for 3 h and 5 h with different concentrations. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after HM03 treatment for 3 h and 5 h with different concentrations. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after 10 μM HM03 treatment for 3 h and 5 h. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 3. Effects of GRP78 inhibitor (HM03) treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after HM03 treatment for 3 h and 5 h with different concentrations. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after HM03 treatment for 3 h and 5 h with different concentrations. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after 10 μM HM03 treatment for 3 h and 5 h. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g003
Ijms 24 05855 g004 550
Figure 4. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h before 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 4. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h before 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g004
Ijms 24 05855 g005 550
Figure 5. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h after 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 5. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h after 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g005
Ijms 24 05855 g006 550
Figure 6. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h before 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 6. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h before 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g006
Ijms 24 05855 g007 550
Figure 7. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h after 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 7. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h after 1 μM TM incubation for 16 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. (C) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g007
Ijms 24 05855 g008 550
Figure 8. Effects of 500 μM PA treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after PA treatment for different time points. (B) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after PA treatment for different time points. (C) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after PA treatment for different time points. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 8. Effects of 500 μM PA treatment on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes after PA treatment for different time points. (B) Protein levels of ER stress-related proteins and inflammatory-related proteins after PA treatment for different time points. (C) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes after PA treatment for different time points. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g008
Ijms 24 05855 g009 550
Figure 9. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h before 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 9. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h before 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g009
Ijms 24 05855 g010 550
Figure 10. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h after 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 10. Effects of 10 μM BiP treatment for 4 h after 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g010
Ijms 24 05855 g011 550
Figure 11. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h before 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 11. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h before 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g011
Ijms 24 05855 g012 550
Figure 12. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h after 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Figure 12. Effects of 10 μM HM03 treatment for 4 h after 500 μM PA incubation for 6 h on ER stress and inflammation in macrophages of large yellow croakers. (A) Relative mRNA expression of ER stress-related genes. (B) Relative mRNA expression of inflammatory genes. Values are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3). * Significant difference (p < 0.05); ** highly significant difference (p < 0.01).
Ijms 24 05855 g012
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sun, J.; Mai, K.; Ai, Q. Effects of GRP78 on Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Inflammatory Response in Macrophages of Large Yellow Croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24065855

AMA Style

Sun J, Mai K, Ai Q. Effects of GRP78 on Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Inflammatory Response in Macrophages of Large Yellow Croaker (Larimichthys crocea). International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(6):5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24065855

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sun, Jie, Kangsen Mai, and Qinghui Ai. 2023. "Effects of GRP78 on Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Inflammatory Response in Macrophages of Large Yellow Croaker (Larimichthys crocea)" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 6: 5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24065855

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop