| Literature DB >> 18775071 |
Sharon L R Simon1, Lise Lamoureux, Margot Plews, Michael Stobart, Jillian LeMaistre, Ute Ziegler, Catherine Graham, Stefanie Czub, Martin Groschup, J David Knox.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) epidemic and the emergence of a new human variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (vCJD) have led to profound changes in the production and trade of agricultural goods. The rapid tests currently approved for BSE monitoring in slaughtered cattle are all based on the detection of the disease related isoform of the prion protein, PrPd, in brain tissue and consequently are only suitable for post-mortem diagnosis.Entities:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18775071 PMCID: PMC2546380 DOI: 10.1186/1477-5956-6-23
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proteome Sci ISSN: 1477-5956 Impact factor: 2.480
Sample loading and labelling matrix.
| infected | 38 | na | na | 0 | control | 67 | 23 | Cy3 | 0 |
| infected | 40 | 1 | Cy5 | 0 | control | 69 | 22 | Cy5 | 0 |
| infected | 53 | 15 | Cy3 | 0 | control | 72 | 11 | Cy5 | 0 |
| infected | 54 | 17 | Cy5 | 0 | control | 73 | 13 | Cy3 | 0 |
| infected | 38 | 24 | Cy3 | 8 | control | 67 | 1 | Cy3 | 8 |
| infected | 40 | 8 | Cy3 | 8 | control | 69 | 3 | Cy5 | 8 |
| infected | 53 | 13 | Cy5 | 8 | control | 72 | 23 | Cy5 | 8 |
| infected | 54 | 8 | Cy5 | 8 | control | 73 | 9 | Cy3 | 8 |
| infected | 38 | 19 | Cy5 | 16 | control | 67 | 24 | Cy5 | 16 |
| infected | 40 | 27 | Cy3 | 16 | control | 69 | 14 | Cy3 | 16 |
| infected | 53 | 25 | Cy3 | 16 | control | 72 | 16 | Cy5 | 16 |
| infected | 54 | 18 | Cy3 | 16 | control | 73 | 6 | Cy5 | 16 |
| infected | 38 | 19 | Cy3 | 24 | control | 67 | 15 | Cy5 | 24 |
| infected | 40 | 21 | Cy3 | 24 | control | 69 | 17 | Cy3 | 24 |
| infected | 53 | na | na | 24 | control | 72 | 3 | Cy3 | 24 |
| infected | 54 | 26 | Cy5 | 24 | control | 73 | 21 | Cy5 | 24 |
| infected | 38 | 10 | Cy5 | 32 | control | 67 | 14 | Cy5 | 32 |
| infected | 40 | 12 | Cy3 | 32 | control | 69 | 9 | Cy5 | 32 |
| infected | 53 | 25 | Cy5 | 32 | control | 72 | 2 | Cy5 | 32 |
| infected | 54 | 6 | Cy3 | 32 | control | 73 | 16 | Cy3 | 32 |
| infected | 38 | 10 | Cy3 | 40 | control | 67 | 20 | Cy3 | 40 |
| infected | 40 | 11 | Cy3 | 40 | control | 69 | 2 | Cy3 | 40 |
| infected | 53 | 18 | Cy5 | 40 | control | 72 | 26 | Cy3 | 40 |
| infected | 54 | 12 | Cy5 | 40 | control | 73 | 27 | Cy5 | 40 |
The disease state, cow identity and months post infection (mpi) identify the sample. Dyes and gels were randomly assigned to the 4 biological replicates of infected and control cows to minimize the influence of dye bias and gel to gel variation. The 2 infected samples marked NA were either not collected (cow 52, 24 mpi) or no suitable gel image was obtained (cow 38, 0 mpi)
Figure 1Representative Cy2-labelled internal standard proteome gel image illustrating proteins resolved in the pH4-7 range. The gel image as loaded into the DIA module prior to spot detection (A). In panel B the 1329 spot features, including spots at the edges of the gel that were outside the pH range of the 1st dimension separation, are each denoted by a green dot. The position of the 16 spot features used in the class prediction classifier have been marked with yellow and the associated master gel spot feature number assigned to the same spot features on all gels by the DeCyder BVA module are shown.
Figure 2Principle component analysis of the 8 biological replicates. The samples obtained from individual infected and control cows clustered together indicating that disease is the factor that most influences the differential abundance observed in the urine samples. The time of the 6 sample collections from cow #54 are given to illustrate that the urine proteome of this animal diverged further from all the other animals as the disease progressed. This analysis was based on the 36 spot features exhibiting statistically significant (ANOVA p < 0.01) changes in abundance and present on all 46 gel images. (PC1 = 36.3, PC2 = 15.2).
Figure 3Principle component analysis of different disease states followed throughout the disease progression. Ellipses have been drawn to illustrate the clustering of the 3 groups (BSE infected, control and normal). Within the infected group it can also be seen that the individual time points cluster together. A somewhat similar but less pronounced pattern is observed in the control samples. This analysis is based on the 56 spot features exhibiting statistically significant (ANOVA p < 0.01) changes in abundance and present on all 40 gel images. (PC1 = 38.6, PC2 = 23.0).
Figure 4Differentially abundant spot features. Principle component analysis of 56 spot features that exhibited statistically significant (ANOVA p < 0.01) changes in abundance and were present on all 40 gels (A). The red rectangle on the gel image shows the region on the gels where the potential outliers were situated. Two magnified views of this region showing infected and control images (B). 3D images of spot feature 405 showing the 23.68 fold increase in abundance observed at 8 mpi (C). Graphical representation of the standardized log abundance data obtained for spot feature 405 (D).
Classification Matrix
| 83.33% ± 18.3 | Class Prediction | ||
| control | infected | normal | |
| control | 0 | 3 | |
| infected | 0 | 0 | |
| normal | 0 | 0 | |
| no class | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| error | 0 | 0 | 3 |
The classifier created was applied to the training set to assign gel maps with respect to disease state. The classification matrix shows an overview of the classification of the gel maps. Gels that were correctly classified are displayed in bold type. A classifier containing 16 biomarkers was used to discriminate between the 3 groups with 83.33% ± 18.3 accuracy. A single protein was able to discriminate between control and infected samples with 100% accuracy.
Disease Progression Matrix
| 85% ± 13.2 | Infected Progression | ||||
| 08 mpi | 16 mpi | 24 mpi | 32 mpi | 40 mpi | |
| 08 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 16 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 24 mpi | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| 32 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 40 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| no class | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| error | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
The classifier created was applied to the training set to assign gel maps with respect to disease progression. The classification matrix shows an overview of the classification of the gel maps. Gels that were correctly classified are displayed in bold type. A classifier containing 16 biomarkers was used to discriminate between the 5 time points with 85% ± 13.2 accuracy. The two misclassified samples at 32 mpi were placed into the immediately proceeding sampling time.
Aging Matrix
| 85% ± 19.1 | Control Progression | ||||
| 08 mpi | 16 mpi | 24 mpi | 32 mpi | 40 mpi | |
| 08 mpi | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 16 mpi | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| 24 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 32 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 40 mpi | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| no class | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| error | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
The classifier created was applied to the training set to assign gel maps with respect to sample collection time. The classification matrix shows an overview of the classification of the gel maps. Gels that were correctly classified are displayed in bold type. A classifier containing 16 biomarkers was used to discriminate between the 5 time points with 85% ± 19.2 accuracy. The misclassified samples at 16 and 24 mpi were placed into the immediately proceeding sampling times. The misclassified sample at 32 mpi was classified as 16 mpi.
Biomarker sets used to create classifiers.
| Control Progression | Disease Progression | Class Prediction | ||||
| Spot # | Rank | Spot # | Rank | Spot # | Rank | |
| 1 | 161 | 10 | 125 | 9 | 2 | |
| 2 | 168 | 8 | 127 | 6 | 393 | 3 |
| 3 | 395 | 2 | 239 | 4 | 405 | 1 |
| 4 | 473 | 6 | 297 | 10 | 11 | |
| 5 | 482 | 6 | 437 | 1 | 749 | 12 |
| 6 | 603 | 3 | 5 | 896 | 10 | |
| 7 | 608 | 5 | 626 | 6 | 8 | |
| 8 | 8 | 11 | 1038 | 7 | ||
| 9 | 860 | 10 | 740 | 8 | 12 | |
| 10 | 1006 | 10 | 841 | 9 | 1043 | 4 |
| 11 | 1007 | 4 | 911 | 7 | 1071 | 12 |
| 12 | 1101 | 7 | 3 | 1123 | 9 | |
| 13 | 1127 | 9 | 2 | 1124 | 5 | |
| 14 | 1200 | 1 | 1078 | 12 | 10 | |
| 15 | 1278 | 4 | 1103 | 11 | 1198 | 8 |
| 16 | 1457 | 9 | 1318 | 10 | 1228 | 6 |
In this particular instance each classifier was composed of 16 biomarkers. Biomarkers that appear in more than one classifier are in italics. The three biomarkers in the class prediction set that were not identified by MS analysis (387,1041,1150) are in bold faced type.
Figure 5Proteins that exhibited a steady increase or decrease in abundance throughout disease progression. The average standardized abundance ratios of the top three ranked proteins used in the disease progression classier (437, 1041, 1022) are shown. The consistent increase or decrease in abundance over the course of the experiment illustrates the utility of the relative abundance of these spot features in classifying the urine samples with respect to date post infection.
Thirteen of the 16 spot features included in the class prediction classifier were identified. The average ratios at each time point are given.
| Average Ratio (infected/control) | |||||||
| Spot | Protein ID | 0 mpi | 8 mpi | 16 mpi | 24 mpi | 32 mpi | 40 mpi |
| 387 | 2.04 | 12.35 | 10.91 | 7.63 | 2.46 | 8.70 | |
| 393 | clusterin (Bos Taurus) | 2.44 | 11.36 | 9.17 | 5.23 | 10.12 | 6.76 |
| 405 | clusterin (Bos Taurus) | 4.05 | 23.68 | 77.54 | 17.00 | 54.36 | 33.80 |
| 597 | Ig Gamma-2 chain C region (Bos taurus) | 1.98 | -1.4 | 3.58 | 2.35 | 3.03 | 4.93 |
| 749 | simlar to GCAP-11/uroguanylin (Bos taurus) | -1.33 | 1.80 | 1.03 | -1.23 | 1.03 | 1.15 |
| 896 | cystatin E/M (Bos Taurus) | -1.15 | 1.13 | -1.09 | 1.23 | -1.33 | 1.10 |
| 1022 | cathelicidin antimicrobial peptide (Bos Taurus) | -1.10 | -1.12 | -1.02 | -2.54 | -1.61 | -1.91 |
| 1038 | cathelicidin 1 (Bos Taurus) | -3.84 | 1.03 | -1.91 | -4.13 | -2.46 | -1.87 |
| 1041 | -1.10 | -1.17 | -1.14 | -2.77 | -1.80 | -2.18 | |
| 1043 | cathelicidin 1 (Bos Taurus) | 1.35 | 1.27 | 1.13 | -2.99 | -1.61 | -1.60 |
| 1071 | cathelicidin 1 (Bos Taurus) | 1.23 | -1.47 | -1.20 | -2.29 | -1.76 | -1.81 |
| 1123 | simlar to GCAP-11/uroguanylin (Bos taurus) | 1.35 | -1.14 | 1.05 | -2.98 | -1.91 | -2.51 |
| 1124 | simlar to GCAP-11/uroguanylin (Bos taurus) | 1.27 | -3.52 | -2.25 | -3.19 | -2.28 | -2.55 |
| 1150 | 1.38 | -3.02 | -1.66 | -1.08 | -5.36 | 1.01 | |
| 1198 | simlar to GCAP-11/uroguanylin (Bos taurus) | -1.34 | -3.00 | -1.49 | -1.04 | -4.16 | -1.43 |
| 1228 | simlar to GCAP-11/uroguanylin (Bos taurus) | -1.11 | -5.84 | -5.19 | -6.95 | -3.20 | -3.98 |