Skip to main content

Table 3 Significant gene expression changes between sham and IUGR rats at 5, 20 and 40 dpp

From: Impact of uteroplacental insufficiency on ovarian follicular pool in the rat

Cluster

Gene

Sham vs IUGR

dpp 5

dpp 20

dpp 40

Proliferation

Mki67

  

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 0.5 ± 0.2

Pcna

  

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 0.6 ± 0.2

Cdkn1b

  

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 0.7 ± 0.1

Top2a

  

1.0 ± 0.2 vs 0.4 ± 0.1

Tk1

  

1.1 ± 0.6 vs 0.4 ± 0.2

Apoptosis

Casp9

  

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 0.8 ± 0.1

Energetics

Cs

  

1.0 ± 0.2 vs 0.8 ± 0.1

Ldhb

 

1.0 ± 0.2 vs 1.3 ± 0.3

 

Ldhc

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 0.6 ± 0.1

  

Slc2a1

  

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 1.6 ± 0.5

Angiogenesis

Tgfb1

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 0.7 ± 0.1

  

Tgfb2

 

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 0.7 ± 0.3

 

Angpt1

 

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 0.8 ± 0.3

 

Pdgfra

 

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 1.4 ± 0.1

 

Insulin/IGF pathways

Igf1r

 

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 0.8 ± 0.1

1.0 ± 0.2 vs 0.8 ± 0.1

Igfbp3

  

1.0 ± 0.4 vs 3.0 ± 0.9

Germ cell markers

Fgf4

1.1 ± 0.4 vs 0.6 ± 0.2

  

Fgf5

 

1.5 ± 1.5 vs 0.2 ± 0.1

 

Thy1

1.0 ± 0.3 vs 1.4 ± 0.2

  

Zbtb16

1.1 ± 0.5 vs 0.5 ± 0.2

  

GC markers

Amh

 

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 0.8 ± 0.1

 

Inhbb

  

1.0 ± 0.1 vs 0.5 ± 0.3

Gata6

  

1.0 ± 0.2 vs 0.7 ± 0.1

TC markers

Insl3

 

1.1 ± 0.6 vs 3.0 ± 1.9

 
  1. Values are expressed as means ± standard deviations of gene expression fold changes. Dpp, days post-partum; GC, granulosa cell; IGF, insulin growth factor; IUGR, intrauterine growth restricted; TC, theca cell. Student T-test, P < 0.05. For the list of gene names and abbreviation please refer to Table 2. At the age of 5 dpp, 6 IUGR versus 3 sham rats were included. At 20 and 40 dpp, 6 animals per group were included
Back to article page

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology

ISSN: 1477-7827

Contact us