BioMed Research International

BioMed Research International / 2017 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2017 |Article ID 8589347 | 8 pages | https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8589347

Screening for Key Pathways Associated with the Development of Osteoporosis by Bioinformatics Analysis

Academic Editor: Shinji Kuroda
Received21 Oct 2016
Revised13 Jan 2017
Accepted26 Jan 2017
Published30 Mar 2017

Abstract

Objectives. We aimed to find the key pathways associated with the development of osteoporosis. Methods. We downloaded expression profile data of GSE35959 and analyzed the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in 3 comparison groups (old_op versus middle, old_op versus old, and old_op versus senescent). KEGG (Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) pathway enrichment analyses were carried out. Besides, Venn diagram analysis and gene functional interaction (FI) network analysis were performed. Results. Totally 520 DEGs, 966 DEGs, and 709 DEGs were obtained in old_op versus middle, old_op versus old, and old_op versus senescent groups, respectively. Lysosome pathway was the significantly enriched pathways enriched by intersection genes. The pathways enriched by subnetwork modules suggested that mitotic metaphase and anaphase and signaling by Rho GTPases in module 1 had more proteins from module. Conclusions. Lysosome pathway, mitotic metaphase and anaphase, and signaling by Rho GTPases may be involved in the development of osteoporosis. Furthermore, Rho GTPases may regulate the balance of bone resorption and bone formation via controlling osteoclast and osteoblast. These 3 pathways may be regarded as the treatment targets for osteoporosis.

1. Introduction

Primary osteoporosis is a polygenetic disease characterized by an imbalance of bone homeostasis including microarchitectural deteriorations and low bone mineral density [1]. It is reported that approximately 5.5 million men and 22 million women had osteoporosis in the European Union in 2010 [2]. Risk factors for osteoporosis include gender, advanced age, and diminished sex steroid production after menopause and in elderly individuals and so on [3, 4]. Thus, it is important to get the molecular mechanisms for osteoporosis and then find the effective treatment methods for it.

It has been reported that strontium results in increased bone formation and decreased bone resorption by the modulation of several pathways including CaSR, ERK1/2-MAPK, and NFATc/Wnt signaling pathways [5]. One study showed that RANKL (receptor activator of NF-κB ligand)/RANK (receptor activator of NF-κB)/OPG (osteoprotegerin) signaling system was essential for skeletal homeostasis, and disruption of it led to inhibition of bone resorption in vitro [6]. The bone formation inhibitor sclerostin encoded by SOST binds in vitro to low density LRP5/6 (lipoprotein receptor-related protein) Wnt coreceptors, thereby inhibiting Wnt/β-catenin signaling, a central pathway of skeletal homeostasis, and LRP5 deficiency results in OPPG (osteoporosis-pseudoglioma), whereas SOST deficiency induces lifelong bone gain in mice and humans [7]. Azuma et al. indicated that the SXR/PXR (Nuclear Receptor Subfamily 1, Group I, Member 2) dependent signaling pathway could mediate the protective effects of vitamin K for bone [8]. Pineda et al. suggested that antioxidant pathways played important roles in bone homeostasis [9]. Furthermore, functional polymorphisms of the P2X7 (Purinergic Receptor P2X, Ligand Gated Ion Channel, 7) receptor gene are related to osteoporosis [10]. Two single nucleotide polymorphisms of rs4237 and rs2501431 in CNR2 (Cannabinoid Receptor 2) gene may result in postmenopausal osteoporosis in Han Chinese women [11]. Mettl21c (methyltransferase-like 21C) may play bone-muscle pleiotropic roles through the regulation of the NF-κB signaling pathway [12]. However, the underlying mechanisms or key regulating factors for osteoporosis are not fully understood.

Bone marrow mesenchymal cells (BMSCs) are the major source of osteoprogenitor cells resulting in remodeling of bone in adults [13]. The former researches using the data of GSE35959 demonstrated that nuclear factor I-C (NFI-C) regulated osteoblast differentiation [14], mechanical stimulation affected genes expression associated with osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs through the regulation of HDAC1 (Histone Deacetylase 1) [15], or the transcriptional profile of MSC populations in primary osteoporosis showed overexpression of osteogenic inhibitors [16]. In contrast to previous studies, we downloaded this data and analyzed the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in 3 comparison groups. KEGG (Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) pathway enrichment analyses were carried out. Besides, Venn diagram analysis and gene functional interaction (FI) network analysis were performed. We aimed to understand the key pathways associated with the development of osteoporosis and then find the effective treatment methods for it.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Expression Profile Data

The expression profile data of GSE35959 deposited by Benisch et al. was downloaded from the GEO (Gene Expression Omnibus, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) database [16]. A total of 5 middle aged human mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) samples (middle), 4 old elderly MSC samples (old), 5 primary osteoporosis elderly MSC samples (old_op), and 5 senescent MSC samples (senescent) were included in this study. The data were based on the platform of GPL570 (Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array, Affymetrix, Inc., Santa Clara, California, USA).

2.2. Data Preprocessing

The raw data were preprocessed by R package affy (version: 3.24.15) [17] in Bioconductor (http://www.bioconductor.org/). Background correction, normalization between arrays, and calculated expression were included in the process of preprocessing. The probe ID was transformed into gene symbol combined with annotation files of the platform.

2.3. DEGs Analysis

Significant value for DEGs in primary osteoporosis elderly MSC versus middle aged MSC (old_op versus middle), primary osteoporosis elderly MSC versus old elderly MSC (old_op versus old), and primary osteoporosis elderly MSC versus senescent MSC (old_op versus senescent) were analyzed with -test in limma (version: 3.24.15) [18]. The value was adjusted as FDR (false discovery rate) values by BH (Benjamini-Hochberg) [19]. FDR < 0.05 and |log2FC| ≥ 1 were used as cut-off criterion for DEGs.

2.4. KEGG (Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) Pathway Enrichment Analysis

KEGG is a database used for putting associated genes into the corresponding pathways [20]. R package clusterProfiler (version: 2.2.7) [21] based on KEGG.db annotation package was used to the pathway enrichment analysis. Significant values for enriched DEGs were calculated by hypergeometric distribution, and was set as significantly enriched pathway.

2.5. Venn Diagram Analysis for DEGs

VennPlex (http://www.irp.nia.nih.gov/bioinformatics/vennplex.html) [22] can be used to analyze Venn diagram for multiple dataset by using gene expression values and screen out the significant genes. Furthermore, it can display the number of intersection genes that are upregulated, downregulated, and contraregulated, respectively. By using a large set of functional association data including protein and genetic interactions, pathways, coexpression, colocalization, and protein domain similarity, GeneMANIA [23] can find other genes associated with a set of input genes.

DEGs and log2FC of 3 comparison groups were input into VennPlex, and the similarities and differences in 3 comparison groups were observed. Furthermore, KEGG pathways enriched by intersection DEGs in 3 groups were obtained. The correlations among intersection DEGs were analyzed by Cytoscape (version: 3.2.1) [24] app-GeneMANIA.

2.6. Gene Functional Interaction (FI) Network Analysis

The ReactomeFIViz app [25] can construct FI network, calculate correlations (average Pearson correlation coefficient) among genes, use the calculated correlations as weights for edges, apply Monte Carlo localization graph clustering algorithm to the weighted FI network, and generate a subnetwork for a list of selected network modules.

Gene functional interaction networks were analyzed with Cytoscape app-ReactomeFIViz. The input dataset was expression matrix of all DEGs, and pathway enrichment analysis for every function module was performed to find biological pathway involved by every module genes (FDR < 0.05). Other ReactomeFI parameters were set as defaults.

3. Results

3.1. DEGs Analysis

A total of 520 DEGs, 966 DEGs, and 709 DEGs were obtained in old_op versus middle, old_op versus old, and old_op versus senescent groups, respectively (Table 1).


GroupUpregulated gene countDownregulated gene countTotal

old_op versus middle91429520
old_op versus old270696966
old_op versus senescent336373709

3.2. Functional Enrichment Analysis

The significantly enriched KEGG pathways for 3 comparison groups were shown in Figure 1. Cell cycle pathway was the significantly enriched pathway in old_op versus middle, and focal adhesion pathway was the significantly enriched pathway in old_op versus old, as well as old_op versus senescent.

3.3. Venn Diagram Analysis for DEGs

Venn diagram analysis for DEGs was shown in Figure 2. A total of 36 upregulated genes and 47 downregulated genes were included in DEGs of 3 comparison groups. KEGG pathways significantly enriched by intersection genes were shown in Figure 3. Lysosome pathway enriched by LAPTM5 (Lysosomal Protein Transmembrane 5, upregulated), CTSD (Cathepsin D, upregulated), LIPA (Lipase A, Lysosomal Acid Type, downregulated), and AGA (Aspartylglucosaminidase, downregulated) was the significantly enriched pathways enriched by intersection genes. The interaction network among intersection genes obtained by GeneMANIA analysis was shown in Figure 4, and 79 intersection genes and 367 interaction pairs were included in the interaction network. In addition, this interaction network included 5 association data items (262 coexpressions, 7 physical interactions, 80 genetic interactions, 17 colocalization, and 1 pathway).

3.4. Gene Functional Interaction Network Analysis

The functional interaction network for DEGs obtained by ReactomeFI was shown in Figure 5, and 240 nodes and 1309 interaction pairs were included in it. Furthermore, this network included 16 significant subnetwork modules (Table 2). Module 0 and module 1 had more nodes. The absolute value of average correlation between subnetwork module genes was high. In addition, pathways enriched by subnetwork modules were shown in Table 3. Mitotic metaphase and anaphase and signaling by Rho GTPases in module 1 had more proteins from module.


ModuleNodes in moduleAverage correlation

0510.5639
1370.7701
2240.6355
3140.848
4140.7763
5140.5407
6100.5594
7100.4676
890.7657
990.7226
1090.5833
1190.5608
1290.5231
1390.3758
1480.3205
1570.546


ModuleGene setProtein from moduleFDR

0Transcriptional regulation of white adipocyte differentiation (R)6
0Chromatin modifying enzymes (R)6
1Mitotic metaphase and anaphase (R)23
1Signaling by Rho GTPases (R)21
3Synthesis of DNA (R)11
3S phase (R)11
4DNA damage bypass (R)8
4Fanconi anemia pathway (N)9
5Heterotrimeric G-protein signaling pathway-Gq alpha and Go alpha mediated pathway (P)5
5Wnt signaling pathway (P)6
6Protein kinase a at the centrosome (B)2
6Prostate cancer (K)3
7Signaling by Rho GTPases (R)8
7Regulation of RhoA activity (N)2
8Mitotic telophase/cytokinesis (R)4
8Mitotic prometaphase (R)4
9Interferon alpha/beta signaling (R)5
9ISG15 antiviral mechanism (R)4
10Cadherin signaling pathway (P)6
10Wnt signaling pathway (P)6
11Nucleosome assembly (R)9
11Mitotic prometaphase (R)6
12Beta1 integrin cell surface interactions (N)4
12ECM-receptor interaction (K)3
13Formation of fibrin clot (clotting cascade) (R)2
13AP-1 transcription factor network (N)2
14TGF-beta signaling pathway (P)4
14TGF-beta signaling pathway (K)4
15Insulin-mediated glucose transport (N)2
15Class I PI3K signaling events mediated by Akt (N)2

The source of pathway database: C: CellMap, R: Reactome, K: KEGG, N: NCI PID, P: Panther, and B: BioCarta.

4. Discussions

In the current study, with the expression profile data of GSE35959, totally 520 DEGs, 966 DEGs, and 709 DEGs were obtained in old_op versus middle, old_op versus old, and old_op versus senescent groups, respectively. Lysosome pathway was the significantly enriched pathways enriched by intersection genes. Furthermore, the pathways enriched by subnetwork modules suggested that mitotic metaphase and anaphase and signaling by Rho GTPases in module 1 had more proteins from module.

Lysosome pathway was the significantly enriched pathways enriched by intersection genes in our present study. RANKL/RANK/OPG signaling system was essential for skeletal homeostasis, and one study showed that RANKL was found to be localized to secretory lysosomes in osteoblastic cells [26]. Yoneshima et al. suggested that lysosomal biogenesis mediated by TFEB (Transcription Factor EB) might be involved in osteoblast differentiation [27]. Furthermore, osteoporosis is characterized by an imbalance of bone resorption and bone formation [28]. Thus, our results are according to the previous studies and show that lysosome pathway plays important parts in the development of osteoporosis.

Furthermore, mitotic metaphase and anaphase in module 1 had more proteins from module in this study. The transcription of Runx2 mRNA is dependent on mitosis and the translation of it after mitosis in early osteoprogenitors to control the gene expression required for reinforcement of cell fate decisions in committed preosteoblasts [29]. One study indicated that LRP1 (low density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1) could activate the p42/44 MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinase) pathway and then lead to the mitosis of osteoblasts [30]. Thus, mitosis is significant for the osteoblasts. Besides, osteoblasts play key roles in the bone formation, and osteoporosis is characterized by the imbalance of bone resorption and bone formation. Therefore, combined with our results, we speculate that mitotic metaphase and anaphase may play key roles in the progression of osteoporosis.

In addition, our study also showed that signaling by Rho GTPases in module 1 had more proteins from module. Rho GTPases may control podosome arrangements in osteoclasts [31]. Brazier et al. showed that the Rho GTPase Wrch1 (Ras Homolog Family Member U) regulated precursor adhesion and migration of osteoclast [32]. Touaitahuata et al. suggested that Rho GTPases could modulate osteoclast differentiation and bone resorption [33]. Besides, Wan et al. indicated that Rho GTPases controlled TCF/LEF (hepatocyte nuclear factor 4, alpha) activity and nuclear localization of β-catenin in osteoblasts under flow [34]. Thus, Rho GTPases may play roles in osteoclast and osteoblast. Rho GTPases may regulate the balance of bone resorption and bone formation via controlling osteoclast and osteoblast. Combined with our results, we think that signaling by Rho GTPases may be involved in the development of osteoporosis.

However, there are several limitations in this study. First, only 19 samples including 5 middle aged MSCs, 4 old elderly MSCs, 5 primary osteoporosis elderly MSCs, and 5 senescent MSCs were included in this study. Second, in Results, the interaction network among intersection genes includes 79 intersection genes and 367 interaction pairs, but there is no significant difference among the weight of these intersection genes. Third, our study is concluded from the bioinformatics analysis of the expression profile data downloaded from the GEO database, and further experiments are needed to verify our results.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, lysosome pathway, mitotic metaphase and anaphase, and signaling by Rho GTPases may be involved in the development of osteoporosis. Furthermore, Rho GTPases may regulate the balance of bone resorption and bone formation via controlling osteoclast and osteoblast. Lysosome pathway, mitotic metaphase and anaphase, and signaling by Rho GTPases may be regarded as the treatment targets for osteoporosis. However, further studies with large samples and verification experiments are needed.

Additional Points

Highlights. (1) Lysosome pathway may be involved in the development of osteoporosis. (2) Mitotic metaphase and anaphase may play key roles in osteoporosis. (3) Signaling by Rho GTPases may be important for the development of osteoporosis. (4) These 3 pathways may be regarded as the treatment targets for osteoporosis.

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ Contributions

Yanqing Liu and Yueqiu Wang should be regarded as co-first authors.

References

  1. T. D. Rachner, S. Khosla, and L. C. Hofbauer, “Osteoporosis: now and the future,” The Lancet, vol. 377, no. 9773, pp. 1276–1287, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  2. A. Svedbom, E. Hernlund, M. Ivergård et al., “Osteoporosis in the European Union: a compendium of country-specific reports,” Archives of Osteoporosis, vol. 8, no. 1-2, pp. 1–218, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  3. E. Seeman, “Bone quality: the material and structural basis of bone strength,” Journal of Bone and Mineral Metabolism, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. P. Pietschmann, M. Rauner, W. Sipos, and K. Kerschan-Schindl, “Osteoporosis: an age-related and gender-specific disease—a mini-review,” Gerontology, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 3–12, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. Z. Saidak and P. J. Marie, “Strontium signaling: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic implications in osteoporosis,” Pharmacology & Therapeutics, vol. 136, no. 2, pp. 216–226, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  6. B. F. Boyce and L. Xing, “Functions of RANKL/RANK/OPG in bone modeling and remodeling,” Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, vol. 473, no. 2, pp. 139–146, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. M.-K. Chang, I. Kramer, H. Keller et al., “Reversing LRP 5-dependent osteoporosis and SOST deficiency–induced sclerosing bone disorders by altering WNT signaling activity,” Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 29–42, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. K. Azuma, Y. Ouchi, and S. Inoue, “Vitamin K: novel molecular mechanisms of action and its roles in osteoporosis,” Geriatrics & Gerontology International, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. B. Pineda, E. Serna, A. Laguna-Fernández et al., “Gene expression profile induced by ovariectomy in bone marrow of mice: a functional approach to identify new candidate genes associated to osteoporosis risk in women,” Bone, vol. 65, pp. 33–41, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. L. Husted, T. Harsløf, L. Stenkjær, M. Carstens, N. Jørgensen, and B. L. Langdahl, “Functional polymorphisms in the P2X7 receptor gene are associated with osteoporosis,” Osteoporosis International, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 949–959, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. C. Zhang, J. Ma, G. Chen, D. Fu, L. Li, and M. Li, “Evaluation of common variants in CNR2 gene for bone mineral density and osteoporosis susceptibility in postmenopausal women of Han Chinese,” Osteoporosis International, vol. 26, no. 12, pp. 2803–2810, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  12. J. Huang, Y. H. Hsu, C. Mo et al., “METTL21C is a potential pleiotropic gene for osteoporosis and sarcopenia acting through the modulation of the NF-κB signaling pathway,” Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 1531–1540, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  13. H.-M. Hu, L. Yang, Z. Wang et al., “Overexpression of integrin a2 promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs from senile osteoporosis through the ERK pathway,” International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 841–852, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  14. D. S. Lee, H. W. Choung, H. J. Kim et al., “NFI-C regulates osteoblast differentiation via control of osterix expression,” Stem cells, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 2467–2479, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  15. J. Wang, C. Wang, N. Zhang et al., “Mechanical stimulation orchestrates the osteogenic differentiation of human bone marrow stromal cells by regulating HDAC1,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 7, no. 5, article e2221, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  16. P. Benisch, T. Schilling, L. Klein-Hitpass et al., “The transcriptional profile of mesenchymal stem cell populations in primary osteoporosis is distinct and shows overexpression of osteogenic inhibitors,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 9, Article ID e45142, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. L. Gautier, L. Cope, B. M. Bolstad, and R. A. Irizarry, “Affy—analysis of Affymetrix GeneChip data at the probe level,” Bioinformatics, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 307–315, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. G. K. Smyth, “Limma: linear models for microarray data,” in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Solutions Using R and Bioconductor, pp. 397–420, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2005. View at: Google Scholar
  19. J. A. Ferreira, “The Benjamini-Hochberg method in the case of discrete test statistics,” International Journal of Biostatistics, vol. 3, no. 1, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
  20. E. Altermann and T. R. Klaenhammer, “PathwayVoyager: pathway mapping using the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) database,” BMC Genomics, vol. 6, no. 1, article 60, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. G. Yu, L.-G. Wang, Y. Han, and Q.-Y. He, “clusterProfiler: an R package for comparing biological themes among gene clusters,” Omics: A Journal of Integrative Biology, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 284–287, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. H. Cai, H. Chen, T. Yi et al., “VennPlex—a novel Venn diagram program for comparing and visualizing datasets with differentially regulated datapoints,” PLoS ONE, vol. 8, no. 1, Article ID e53388, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  23. J. Montojo, K. Zuberi, H. Rodriguez, G. D. Bader, and Q. Morris, “GeneMANIA: fast gene network construction and function prediction for Cytoscape,” F1000Research, vol. 3, article 153, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  24. P. Shannon, A. Markiel, O. Ozier et al., “Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks,” Genome Research, vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 2498–2504, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. G. Wu, E. Dawson, A. Duong, R. Haw, and L. Stein, “ReactomeFIViz: a Cytoscape app for pathway and network-based data analysis,” F1000Research, vol. 3, article 146, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  26. Y. Kariya, M. Honma, A. Hanamura et al., “Rab27a and Rab27b are involved in stimulation-dependent RANKL release from secretory lysosomes in osteoblastic cells,” Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 689–703, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. E. Yoneshima, K. Okamoto, E. Sakai, K. Nishishita, N. Yoshida, and T. Tsukuba, “The transcription factor EB (TFEB) regulates osteoblast differentiation through ATF4/CHOP-dependent pathway,” Journal of Cellular Physiology, vol. 231, no. 6, pp. 1321–1333, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. N. M. Appelman-Dijkstra and S. E. Papapoulos, “Modulating bone resorption and bone formation in opposite directions in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis,” Drugs, vol. 75, no. 10, pp. 1049–1058, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  29. N. Varela, A. Aranguiz, C. Lizama et al., “Mitotic inheritance of mRNA facilitates translational activation of the osteogenic-lineage commitment factor Runx2 in progeny of osteoblastic cells,” Journal of Cellular Physiology, vol. 231, no. 5, pp. 1001–1014, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. J.-M. Hou, E.-Y. Chen, F. Lin et al., “Lactoferrin induces osteoblast growth through IGF-1R,” International Journal of Endocrinology, vol. 2015, Article ID 282806, 9 pages, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. S. Ory, H. Brazier, G. Pawlak, and A. Blangy, “Rho GTPases in osteoclasts: orchestrators of podosome arrangement,” European Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 87, no. 8-9, pp. 469–477, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. H. Brazier, G. Pawlak, V. Vives, and A. Blangy, “The Rho GTPase Wrch1 regulates osteoclast precursor adhesion and migration,” The International Journal of Biochemistry & Cell Biology, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1391–1401, 2009. View at: Google Scholar
  33. H. Touaitahuata, A. Blangy, and V. Vives, “Modulation of osteoclast differentiation and bone resorption by Rho GTPases,” Small GTPases, vol. 5, no. 1, article e28119, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  34. Q. Wan, E. Cho, P. Zhang, H. Yokota, and S. Na, “Rho GTPases control nuclear localization of beta-catenin and TCF/LEF activity in osteoblasts under flow,” Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, vol. 28, 2013. View at: Google Scholar

Copyright © 2017 Yanqing Liu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

925 Views | 368 Downloads | 0 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.