PPARβ/δ ameliorates fructose-induced insulin resistance in adipocytes by preventing Nrf2 activation

We studied whether PPARβ/δ deficiency modifies the effects of high fructose intake (30% fructose in drinking water) on glucose tolerance and adipose tissue dysfunction, focusing on the CD36-dependent pathway that enhances adipose tissue inflammation and impairs insulin signaling. Fructose intake for 8weeks significantly increased body and liver weight, and hepatic triglyceride accumulation in PPARβ/δ-deficient mice but not in wild-type mice. Feeding PPARβ/δ-deficient mice with fructose exacerbated glucose intolerance and led to macrophage infiltration, inflammation, enhanced mRNA and protein levels of CD36, and activation of the JNK pathway in white adipose tissue compared to those of water-fed PPARβ/δ-deficient mice. Cultured adipocytes exposed to fructose also exhibited increased CD36 protein levels and this increase was prevented by the PPARβ/δ activator GW501516. Interestingly, the levels of the nuclear factor E2-related factor 2 (Nrf2), a transcription factor reported to up-regulate Cd36 expression and to impair insulin signaling, were increased in fructose-exposed adipocytes whereas co-incubation with GW501516 abolished this increase. In agreement with Nrf2 playing a role in the fructose-induced CD36 protein level increases, the Nrf2 inhibitor trigonelline prevented the increase and the reduction in insulin-stimulated AKT phosphorylation caused by fructose in adipocytes. Protein levels of the well-known Nrf2 target gene NAD(P)H: quinone oxidoreductase 1 (Nqo1) were increased in water-fed PPARβ/δ-null mice, suggesting that PPARβ/δ deficiency increases Nrf2 activity; and this increase was exacerbated in fructose-fed PPARβ/δ-deficient mice. These findings indicate that the combination of high fructose intake and PPARβ/δ deficiency increases CD36 protein levels via Nrf2, a process that promotes chronic inflammation and insulin resistance in adipose tissue.

Authorship in scientific publications: analysis and recommendations.

In 2008, a Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences working group chaired by Professor Emilio Bossi issued a "Memorandum on scientific integrity and the handling of misconduct in the scientific context", together with a paper setting out principles and procedures concerning integrity in scientific research. In the Memorandum, unjustified claims of authorship in scientific publications are referred to as a form of scientific misconduct - a view widely shared in other countries. In the Principles and Procedures, the main criteria for legitimate authorship are specified, as well as the associated responsibilities. It is in fact not uncommon for disputes about authorship to arise with regard to publications in fields where research is generally conducted by teams rather than individuals. Such disputes may concern not only the question who is or is not to be listed as an author but also, frequently, the precise sequence of names, if the list is to reflect the various authors' roles and contributions. Subjective assessments of the contributions made by the individual members of a research group may differ substantially. As scientific collaboration - often across national boundaries - is now increasingly common, ensuring appropriate recognition of all parties is a complex matter and, where disagreements arise, it may not be easy to reach a consensus. In addition, customs have changed over the past few decades; for example, the practice of granting "honorary" authorship to an eminent researcher - formerly not unusual - is no longer considered acceptable. It should be borne in mind that the publications list has become by far the most important indicator of a researcher's scientific performance; for this reason, appropriate authorship credit has become a decisive factor in the careers of young researchers, and it needs to be managed and protected accordingly. At the international and national level, certain practices have therefore developed concerning the listing of authors and the obligations of authorship. The Scientific Integrity Committee of the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences has collated the relevant principles and regulations and formulated recommendations for authorship in scientific publications. These should help to prevent authorship disputes and offer guidance in the event of conflicts.