↓ Skip to main content

Effect of zinc intake on hepatic autophagy during acute alcohol intoxication

Overview of attention for article published in BioMetals, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
Effect of zinc intake on hepatic autophagy during acute alcohol intoxication
Published in
BioMetals, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10534-018-0077-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan P. Liuzzi, Vijaya Narayanan, Huong Doan, Changwon Yoo

Abstract

Autophagy is a conserved mechanism that plays a housekeeping role by eliminating protein aggregates and damaged organelles. Recent studies have demonstrated that acute ethanol intoxication induces hepatic autophagy in mice. The effect of dietary zinc intake on hepatic autophagic flux during ethanol intoxication has not been evaluated using animal models. Herein, we investigated whether zinc deficiency and excess can affect autophagic flux in the liver in mice and in human hepatoma cells acutely exposed to ethanol. A mouse model of binge ethanol feeding was utilized to analyze the effect of low, adequate, and high zinc intake on hepatic autophagic flux during ethanol intoxication. Autophagic flux was inferred by analyzing LC3II/LC3I ratio, protein levels of p62/SQSTM1, Beclin1 and Atg7, and phosphorylation of 4EBP1. In addition, the degradation of the fusion protein LC3-GFP and the formation of autophagosomes and autolysosomes were evaluated in cells. Ethanol treatment stimulated autophagy in mice and cells. High zinc intake resulted in enhanced autophagy in mice exposed to ethanol. Conversely, zinc deficiency was consistently associated with impaired ethanol-induced autophagy in mice and cells. Zinc-deficient mice exhibited a high degree of ethanol-driven steatosis. Furthermore, zinc depletion increased apoptosis in cells exposed to ethanol. The results of this study suggest that adequate zinc intake is necessary for proper stimulation of autophagy by ethanol. Poor zinc status is commonly found among alcoholics and could likely contribute to faulty autophagy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 40%
Other 1 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 20%
Unspecified 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2018.
All research outputs
#11,073,782
of 12,455,224 outputs
Outputs from BioMetals
#343
of 434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,083
of 339,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioMetals
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,455,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 434 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,370 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.