Lin et al.
Supplementary FiguresSupplementary Figure 1. Additional in vivo glucose homeostasis assessment of male and female pSENP1-KO mice on CD. (A) Fasting insulin; (B) fasting glucose, (C) body weight, and (D) IP insulin tolerance of pSENP1-WT, -HET and -KO male mice on CD (n=6-22 mice). (E) Fasting insulin, (F) fasting glucose, (G) body weight, and (H) IP insulin tolerance of pSENP1-WT, -HET and -KO female mice on CD (n=7-17 mice). AUC -area under the curve. Data are mean ± SEM and were compared with student t test, one-way or two-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni post-test. Unless stated otherwise, *-p<0.05, indicated comparison between pSENP1-WT and -KO. Supplementary Figure 2. In vivo glucose homeostasis assessment of female pSENP1-KO mice following HFD. (A) OGTT and (B) associated plasma insulin responses, (C) IP insulin tolerance, (D) body weight, (E) fasting glucose, and (F) fasting insulin of pSENP1-WT, -HET and -KO female mice following HFD (n=9-14 mice). Supplementary Figure 3. Islet morphometry analysis of female pSENP1-KO mice after HFD. (A) Representative immunostaining, -cell mass, islet number, and islet size distribution of female pSENP1-WT (n = 5 mice, 15 sections and 189 islets) and pSENP1-KO (n = 6 mice, 18 sections and 197 islets) following HFD. Insulin (green), glucagon (red), and nuclei (blue). Scale bar=100 µm. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Lin et al. -cell SENP1 limits oral glucose intolerance 2 Supplementary Figure 4. Additional in vivo glucose homeostasis assessment of βSENP1-KO male mice. (A) IP insulin tolerance of male SENP1-WT, -HET, and -KO mice following HFD (n=15, 8, 8 mice). (B) Delta area under the curve (AUC) of IP insulin tolerance tests of male SENP1-WT, -HET, and -KO mice on CD and following HFD (n=6, 6, 6, 15, 8, 8 mice). (C) Fasting insulin of male SENP1-WT, -HET, and -KO mice on CD and following HFD (n=6, 4, 5, 13, 17, 14). (D) fasting glucose (n=15-22 mice) levels and (E) Body weight (n=18-23 mice) in male SENP1-WT and -KO mice on CD and following HFD. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. AUC -area under the curve. Data are mean ± SEM and were compared with student t test, one-way or two-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni post-test. Unless stated otherwise, *-p<0.05, indicated comparison between βSENP1-WT and -KO. Supplementary Figure 5. In vivo glucose homeostasis assessment of βSENP1-KO female mice. (A) Fasting insulin (n=6, 8, 4, 13, 16, 14 mice), (B) fasting glucose (n=21, 22, 20, 21, 21, 22), and (C) body weights (n=30, 23, 25, 20, 22, 22) of female SENP1-WT, -HET, and -KO mice on CD and following HFD. (D) OGTT (n=11, 12, 12 mice), (E) IPGTT (n=10, 11, 9 mice), and (F) IP insulin tolerance (n=6, 9, 8) of female βSENP1-WT, -HET and -KO mice on CD. (G) OGTT (n=11, 13, 11 mice) and (H) associated plasma insulin response (n=7, 7, 8 mice) of female SENP1-WT, -HET, and -KO mice following HFD. (I) IPGTT (n=8, 9, 10 mice), and (J) associated plasma insulin response (n=6, 9, 6 mice) of female SENP1-WT, -HET, and -KO mice following HFD. (K) IP insulin tolerance (n...