Skip to main content
. 2023 Feb 27;61:102635. doi: 10.1016/j.redox.2023.102635

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

The effect of GSTP1 on bone mineral density is more likely to be achieved by osteoclasts than osteoblasts. (A) Mendelian randomization analysis revealed the potential causal effect of MDS on BMD. (B) Region plots of known MDS therapeutic targets in the BMD-related GWAS databases. (C) scRNA-seq biological analysis of bone marrow cells from younger female (49 years old) and older female (60 years old, postmenopausal). (D) Violin plots of GSTP1 expression in different cell populations in bone marrow of two samples. (E) Violin plot comparing GSTP1 expression in bone marrow monocytes of young and old female after data normalization. (F) Protein expression and quantitative results of GSTP1 during the differentiation of BMMs. (G) Protein expression and quantitative results of GSTP1 during the differentiation of Raw264.7 cells. (H) Protein expression and quantification of GSTP1 in BMMs of SHAM-operated and OVX groups(C57BL/6). (I) H&E/TRAP staining and immunohistochemistry of the distal femur showed differences in the expression of GSTP1 between the SHAM-operated and OVX groups(C57BL/6). Green arrows indicate the degree of OVX-induced osteoporosis exhibited by H&E staining, and yellow arrows indicate the immunohistochemistry results of GSTP1 expression on the bone surface.

All WB quantifications in this study were based on the grayscale values exhibited by the bands, all data are presented as mean ± SEM. Experimental data for each quantitative analysis were replicated at least three times. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)