| Literature DB >> 25275468 |
Hye Min Park1, Jong Cheol Shon2, Mee Youn Lee1, Kwang-Hyeon Liu2, Jeong Kee Kim3, Sang Jun Lee3, Choong Hwan Lee1.
Abstract
Although many studies have been performed on the effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation on the skin, only a limited number of reports have investigated these effects on non-skin tissue. This study aimed to describe the metabolite changes in the liver of hairless mice following chronic exposure to UVB radiation. We did not observe significant macroscopic changes or alterations in hepatic cholesterol and triglyceride levels in the liver of UVB-irradiated mice, compared with those for normal mice. In this study, we detected hepatic metabolite changes by UVB exposure and identified several amino acids, fatty acids, nucleosides, carbohydrates, phospholipids, lysophospholipids, and taurine-conjugated cholic acids as candidate biomarkers in response to UVB radiation in the mouse liver by using various mass spectrometry (MS)-based metabolite profiling including ultra-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight (TOF)-MS, gas chromatography-TOF-MS and nanomate LTQ-MS. Glutamine exhibited the most dramatic change with a 5-fold increase in quantity. The results from altering several types of metabolites suggest that chronic UVB irradiation may impact significantly on major hepatic metabolism processes, despite the fact that the liver is not directly exposed to UVB radiation. MS-based metabolomic approach for determining regulatory hepatic metabolites following UV irradiation will provide a better understanding of the relationship between internal organs and UV light.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25275468 PMCID: PMC4183543 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109479
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Metabolic parameters of hairless mice exposed to non-UVB and UVB irradiation for 6 weeks.
| Group | ||
| normal | UVB | |
|
| 7.02±2.29 | 8.61±4.84 |
|
| 3.04±0.21 | 3.17±0.32 |
The assay detects total cholesterol, including cholesterol and cholesteryl esters.
Data were presented as mean ± SD. The statistical analysis was performed by an independent t-test.
Figure 1PCA score plot (A, C, E, G, I) and PLS-DA score plots (B, D, F, H, J) derived from GC-TOF-MS (A, B, E, F), UPLC-Q-TOF-MS (C, D, G, H) and Nanomate LTQ-MS (I, J) data sets for MW (A–D), DM (E–H) and lipid (I, J) extracts of mouse liver tissue after the exposure to UVB radiation for 6 weeks.
▪ - normal, • - UVB.
Summary of parameters for assessment of the quality of OPLS-DA models.
| Extracts | R2Xcum
| R2Ycum
| Q2Ycum
|
| |
|
|
| 0.417 | 0.993 | 0.843 | 0.001 |
|
| 0.379 | 0.984 | 0.834 | <0.001 | |
|
|
| 0.606 | 1.000 | 0.737 | 0.090 |
|
| 0.466 | 1.000 | 0.734 | 0.022 | |
|
|
| 0.521 | 0.812 | 0.587 | 0.015 |
R2Xcum and R2Ycum are the cumulative modeled variation in X and Y matrix, respectively.
Q2Ycum is the cumulative predicted variation in Y matrix.
P is p value obtained from cross validation ANOVA of OPLS-DA.
MW, methanol/water (1∶1, v/v).
DM, dichloromethane/methanol (3∶1, v/v).
The lipid extract for nanomate LTQ-MS analysis was prepared as mentioned in M&M section.
Figure 2S-plots associated with OPLS-DA score plots derived from GC-TOF-MS (A, B), UPLC-Q-TOF-MS (C, D) and nanomate LTQ-MS (E) data sets for MW (A, C), DM (B, D) and lipid (E) extracts of mouse liver tissue after the exposure to UVB radiation for 6 weeks.
The selected variables (▾, VIP>0.7 and p<0.05) are highlighted in S-plots. Each metabolites presented by a inverted triangle (▾) were the same metabolites presented in – .
Metabolites in MW and DM extracts from the mouse liver that were significantly different between the normal and UVB groups after 6 weeks and were tentatively identified using GC-TOF-MS analysis.
| tR (min) | Identified ion (m/z) | Metabolites | Derivatized | Fold Changes | VIP |
| Related metabolism | ID |
| 5.25 | 116 | L-Alanine | (TMS)2 | 0.68 | 1.48 | <0.001 | Amino acid metabolism | STD/MS |
| 6.71 | 171 | Urea | (TMS)2 | 1.93 | 3.80 | 0.004 | Urea cycle | STD/MS |
| 7.06 | 205 | Glycerol | (TMS)3 | 1.31 | 1.14 | 0.001 | Glycerolipid, Carbohydrate metabolism | STD/MS |
| 7.68 | 245 | Fumaric acid | (TMS)2 | 0.52DM | 2.29DM | 0.006 | TCA cycle | STD/MS |
| 8.91 | 179 | Nicotinamide | TMS | 1.16 | 0.88 | 0.001 | Nicotinate and nicotinamide metabolism | STD/MS |
| 9.25 | 232 | Aspartic acid | (TMS)3 | 1.36 | 1.30 | <0.001 | Amino acid metabolism | STD/MS |
| 9.30 | 156 | Pyroglutamic acid | (TMS)2 | 1.22 | 0.84 | 0.024 | Amino acid metabolism | STD/MS |
| 10.04 | 246 | Glutamic acid | (TMS)3 | 1.44 | 1.43 | <0.001 | Amino acid metabolism | STD/MS |
| 10.47 | 326 | Taurine | (TMS)3 | 0.67 | 1.43 | <0.001 | Taurine and hypotaurine metabolism | STD/MS |
| 11.19 | 156 | L-Glutamine | (TMS)3 | 5.05 | 3.37 | <0.001 | Amino acid metabolism | STD/MS |
| 12.02 | 204 | Saccharide | 1.52DM | 1.75DM | 0.009 | Carbohydrate metabolism | MS | |
| 12.08 | 205 | Saccharide | 0.70 | 1.37 | <0.001 | Carbohydrate metabolism | MS | |
| 12.18 | 205 | Glucose | MeOX, (TMS)5 | 0.49 | 4.01 | 0.008 | Carbohydrate metabolism | STD/MS |
| 12.67 | 204 | Saccharide | 0.59 | 1.37 | 0.019 | Carbohydrate metabolism | MS | |
| 12.93 | 313 | Palmitic acid | TMS | 1.21 | 0.97 | 0.001 | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 13.00 | 204 | Saccharide | 1.23 | 0.89 | 0.011 | Carbohydrate metabolism | MS | |
| 13.95 | 337 | Linoleic acid | TMS | 1.63 | 1.39 | 0.008 | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 13.98 | 339 | Oleic acid | TMS | 1.37 | 0.97 | 0.041 | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 14.00 | 339 | Elaidic acid | TMS | 0.84or | 1.19or | 0.007 | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 14.86 | 91 | Arachidonic acid | TMS | 1.16 | 0.72 | 0.037 | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 15.10 | 338 |
| TMS | 1.20MW/1.21DM | 0.86MW/1.24DM | 0.015MW/0.007DM | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 15.14 | 338 |
| TMS | 1.25MW/1.28DM | 0.88MW/1.41DM | 0.030MW/0.009DM | Lipid metabolsim | MS |
| 15.40 | 224 | Uridine | (TMS)4 | 1.22 | 0.94 | 0.010 | Nucleic acid metabolism | STD/MS |
| 15.88 | 91 | Docosahexaenoic acid | TMS | 1.26 | 1.02 | 0.005 | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 16.00 | 371 | Monopalmitin | (TMS)2 | 1.39MW/1.21DM | 1.24MW/1.25DM | 0.004MW/0.008DM | Lipid metabolsim | STD/MS |
| 16.05 | 217 | Inosine | (TMS)4 | 1.23MW/1.42DM | 0.97MW/1.57DM | 0.003MW/0.046DM | Nucleic acid metabolism | STD/MS |
Variables were determined by using the VIP value (>0.7) and p-value (<0.05) from the OPLS-DA model.
MW; MeOH/water extracts, DM; dichloromethane/MeOH extracts.
tR was the retention time.
Fold change was calculated by dividing the mean of the peak intensity of each metabolite from UVB group relative to the normal group.
VIP, variable important in the projection.
ID, identification.
Metabolites were identified using commercial standard compounds (STD) in comparison with the mass spectra (MS) and retention time.
*Saccharide was not successfully identified, but its mass fragments were similar to general mass fragments of saccharides.
Metabolites in lipid extracts from the mouse liver that were significantly different between the normal and UVB groups after 6 weeks and were tentatively identified using nanomate LTQ-MS analysis.
| ID |
| Adduct | Fold change | VIP |
|
| LPC 16∶0 | 496.5 |
| 0.75 | 2.83 | 0.004 |
| LPC 18∶1 | 522.5 |
| 0.63 | 1.95 | 0.001 |
| LPC 18∶0 | 524.5 |
| 0.63 | 2.68 | <0.001 |
| LPC 20∶4 | 544.4 |
| 0.74 | 1.17 | 0.019 |
| LPC 20∶3 | 546.5 |
| 0.66 | 0.81 | 0.014 |
| LPC22∶6 | 568.5 |
| 0.69 | 1.16 | 0.006 |
| PE 34∶2 | 716.5 |
| 1.16 | 0.76 | 0.030 |
| PC 32∶0 | 734.6 |
| 1.10 | 1.02 | 0.028 |
| PE 36∶4 | 740.5 |
| 1.06 | 0.82 | 0.022 |
| PE 36∶2 | 744.5 |
| 1.11 | 0.75 | 0.043 |
| PC 32∶0 | 756.6 |
| 1.21 | 1.44 | 0.005 |
| PC 34∶2 | 758.6 |
| 1.23 | 6.49 | <0.001 |
| PE 38∶6 | 764.5 |
| 1.18 | 3.14 | <0.001 |
| PE 38∶5 | 766.5 |
| 1.09 | 1.49 | 0.006 |
| PC 34∶6 | 772.6 |
| 1.13 | 1.04 | 0.002 |
| PC 34∶3 | 778.6 |
| 1.15 | 0.75 | 0.005 |
| PE 39∶6 |
| ||||
| PE 38∶5 | 788.7 |
| 0.93 | 1.19 | 0.030 |
| PE 39∶0 | 790.5 |
| 1.11 | 1.40 | 0.005 |
| PC 35∶1 | 796.6 |
| 1.20 | 2.48 | 0.018 |
| PE 39∶5 | 802.6 |
| 1.15 | 0.97 | 0.002 |
| PE 39∶0 | 812.7 |
| 0.90 | 1.95 | 0.004 |
| PE 40∶6 | 814.6 |
| 0.92 | 0.87 | 0.008 |
| PC 38∶4 | 832.8 |
| 0.92 | 1.50 | 0.045 |
| PC 38∶3 | 834.8 |
| 0.89 | 2.32 | 0.010 |
| PC 38∶2 | 836.8 |
| 0.90 | 1.18 | 0.004 |
| TG 56∶4 | 928.6 |
| 0.74 | 0.82 | 0.048 |
Variables were selected by VIP value (>0.7) and p value (<0.05) from OPLS-DA models.
Fold change was calculated by dividing the mean of the peak intensity of each metabolite from the UVB-radiated group by that of the normal group.
VIP, variable important in the projection.
Metabolites in MW and DM extracts from the mouse liver that were significantly different between the normal and UVB groups after 6 weeks and were tentatively identified using UPLC-Q-TOF-MS analysis.
| tR (min) | Tentative metabolites | Measured MS ( | M.W. | HMDB Formula | Error (mDa) | Fold change | VIP |
| |
| Negative | Positive | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| 8.09 | LysoPC 22∶6 | 612.3304 | 568.3361 | 567 | C30H50NO7P | 0.3 | 0.49 | 1.74 | <0.001 |
| 8.12 | LysoPE 20∶4 | 500.2770 | 502.2991 | 501 | C25H44NO7P | −0.7 | 0.81DM | 0.83DM | 0.019 |
| 8.15 | LysoPC 20∶4 | 588.3293 | 544.3316 | 543 | C28H50NO7P | −0.8 | 0.52MW/0.81DM | 1.67MW/0.85DM | <0.001MW/0.016DM |
| 8.21 | LysoPC 22∶6 | 612.3292 | 568.3396 | 567 | C30H50NO7P | −0.9 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 0.012 |
| 8.28 | LysoPC 20∶4 | 588.3292 | 544.3357 | 543 | C28H50NO7P | −0.9 | 0.65 | 1.12 | 0.013 |
| 8.49 | LysoPC 20∶3 | 590.3464 | 546.3596 | 545 | C28H52NO7P | 0.6 | 0.33MW/0.69DM | 2.22MW/1.20DM | <0.001MW/0.003DM |
| 8.54 | LysoPC 16∶0 | 540.3307 | 496.3435 | 495 | C24H50NO7P | 0.6 | 0.68MW/0.79DM | 0.93MW/0.97DM | 0.043MW/0.002DM |
| 8.65 | LysoPC 20∶3 | 590.3467 | 546.3624 | 545 | C28H52NO7P | 0.9 | 0.46 | 1.52 | 0.006 |
| 8.74 | LysoPE 16∶0 | 452.2762 | 454.2962 | 453 | C21H44NO7P | −1.5 | 0.67DM | 1.29DM | <0.001 |
| 8.79 | LysoPC 16∶0 | 540.3285 | 496.3407 | 495 | C24H50NO7P | −1.6 | 0.77DM | 1.04DM | 0.002 |
| 8.80 | LysoPC 18∶1 | 566.3464 | 522.3554 | 521 | C26H52NO7P | 0.6 | 0.42 | 1.84 | 0.001 |
| 8.98 | LysoPC 18∶1 | 566.3470 | 522.3516 | 521 | C26H52NO7P | 1.2 | 0.61 | 1.17 | 0.014 |
| 8.99 | LysoPE 18∶1 | 478.2933 | 480.3109 | 479 | C23H46NO7P | −0.1 | 0.61DM | 1.48DM | <0.001 |
|
| |||||||||
| 4.78 | Taurine conjugated cholic acid | 514.2838 | 538.2732 | 515 | C26H45NO7S | −1.6 | 1.39DM | 0.94DM | 0.047or |
| 5.29 | Taurine conjugated cholic acid | 514.2843 | 538.2755 | 515 | C26H45NO7S | 0.4 | 1.25 | 0.86 | 0.008 |
| 6.00 | Taurine conjugated deoxycholic acid | 498.2893 | 522.2805 | 499 | C26H45NO6S | 0.7 | 1.63MW/1.63DM | 1.37MW/1.30DM | <0.001MW/0.012DM |
Variables were selected by VIP value (>0.7) and p-value (<0.05) from OPLS-DA model.
MW; MeOH/water extracts, DM; dichloromethane/MeOH extracts.
FA; formic acid, LysoPC; lysophosphatidylcholine, LysoPE; lysophosphatidylethanolamine.
tR was retention time.
Assignment of metabolites contributing to the observed variance was performed by elemental composition analysis software with calculated mass, mass tolerance (mDa and ppm), double bond equivalent (DBE), and the iFit algorithm was implemented in the MassLynx, and by either commercial standard compounds compared with the retention time and mass spectra or HMDB (The Human Metabolome Data Base (http://www.hmdb.ca/)).
M.W.; molecular weight.
Fold change was calculated by dividing the mean of the peak intensity of each metabolite from UVB group relative to normal group.
VIP, variable important in the projection.
*Asterisk means the two forms of lysoPC, with the fatty acyl groups at positions 1 (sn-1) or 2 (sn-2) on the glycerol backbone.
Cholic acid derivatives with taurine were not successfully identified, but it was predicted to be one of the following compounds: taurocholic acid, taurallocholic acid, tauro-b-muricholic acid, taurohyocholate, or tauroursocholic acid.
Deoxycholic acid derivatives with taurine were not successfully identified, but it was predicted to be one of compounds such as tauroursodeoxycholic acid, taurodeoxycholic acid ortaurochenodesoxycholic acid.