| Literature DB >> 25342931 |
Stefania Ghisaura1, Roberto Anedda1, Daniela Pagnozzi1, Grazia Biosa1, Simona Spada1, Elia Bonaglini1, Roberto Cappuccinelli1, Tonina Roggio1, Sergio Uzzau1, Maria Filippa Addis1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The zootechnical performance of three different commercial feeds and their impact on liver and serum proteins of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata, L.) were assessed in a 12 week feeding trial. The three feeds, named A, B, and C, were subjected to lipid and protein characterization by gas chromatography (GC) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), respectively.Entities:
Keywords: 2D DIGE; Aquaculture; Farmed fish; Fish feed; Gilthead sea bream; Ingenuity pathway analysis; Liver proteins; Mass spectrometry; Proteomics; Serum proteins
Year: 2014 PMID: 25342931 PMCID: PMC4200174 DOI: 10.1186/s12953-014-0044-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proteome Sci ISSN: 1477-5956 Impact factor: 2.480
Fatty acid composition of the three feeds according to GC-MS analysis
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 14:0 | myristic | 5.45 | 0.01 | 8.33 | 0.00 | 2.55 | 0.02 |
| 16:0 | palmitic | 14.96 | 0.13 | 19.82 | 0.02 | 12.67 | 0.04 |
| 16:1 n-7 | palmitoleic | 5.56 | 0.03 | 8.63 | 0.02 | 3.29 | 0.02 |
| 18:0 | stearic | 3.52 | 0.01 | 3.94 | 0.01 | 2.87 | 0.01 |
| 18:1 n-9 | n-9 oleic | 16.67 | 0.05 | 12.01 | 0.01 | 17.72 | 0.11 |
| 18:1 n-11 | n-11 oleic | 2.31 | 0.01 | 3.41 | 0.00 | 1.79 | 0.04 |
| 18:2 n-6 | linoleic | 19.13 | 0.05 | 4.46 | 0.03 | 34.89 | 0.45 |
| 18:3 n-3 (linolenic acid) | α-linolenic | 1.01 | 0.00 | 1.18 | 0.00 | 4.39 | 0.01 |
| 18:4 n-3 | stearidonic | 1.80 | 0.01 | 0.30 | 0.01 | 1.30 | 0.01 |
| 20:5 n-3 | eicosapentaenoic | 11.61 | 0.02 | 15.78 | 0.00 | 3.56 | 0.02 |
| 22:5 n-3 | docosapentaenoic | 1.44 | 0.01 | 2.05 | 0.04 | 0.36 | 0.00 |
| 22:6 n-3 | docosahexaenoic | 7.96 | 0.05 | 7.47 | 0.12 | 4.29 | 0.02 |
Figure 1Protein sources in feeds. Pie charts illustrating the distribution of proteins according to their source in the three feeds used for this study and named a, b, and c. Protein sources are classified according to LC-MS/MS protein identification and ontology attribution.
Biometrical results obtained on gilthead sea breams in the 12 week feeding trial
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| IW (g) | 268.54 ± 27.04 | 294.82 ± 28.05 | 276.61 ± 46.14 |
| FW (g) | 376.43 ± 45.09a | 416.01 ± 47.65b | 373.17 ± 55.28a |
| AWG (g) | 107.89 ± 7.71b | 121.19 ± 5.17a | 96.56 ± 7.21b |
| LSI (%) | 1.00 ± 0.17a | 0.86 ± 0.11b | 0.96 ± 0.11a |
Values are reported as means ± S.E. (number of fish analyzed n = 45/feed for IW, FW, and AWG; n = 9/feed for LSI); a, b, and c indicate statistically different values (p < 0.05, Student’s t-test). IW: initial weight; FW: final weight; AWG: average weight gain; LSI: liver somatic index.
Figure 2Statistical analysis of 2D DIGE results. Statistical analysis of 2D DIGE results. The figure illustrates the heat map (a) and the score plot (b) obtained upon comparison of the liver protein profiles of sea breams at T0 (blue) and after 12 weeks (T12) of feeding with feeds A (pink), B (green), and C (dark red). In the heat map (a), each cell represents the differential protein expression trends, indicating increased expression in green and decreased expression in red. Clustering is performed according to the proteins (left dendrogram) and the sample (top dendrogram). In the score plot (b), sample clustering according to the principal component analysis is reported.
Figure 3Representative 2D PAGE of gilthead sea bream liver proteins. Differentially expressed proteins are circled in the map, and information on their differential expression and identity is reported in Table 3.
Protein expression trends observed for T12A, T12B, and T12C vs T0, expressed as average ratios
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.7 | Heat shock protein | ||
| 7 | 1.52 | UTP-glucose-1-phosphate uridylyltransferase | ||
| 8 | 1.83 | Alpha-amylase | ||
| 9 | 1.77 | Alpha-amylase | ||
| UTP-glucose-1-phosphate uridylyltransferase | ||||
| 10 | 1.74 | UTP-glucose-1-phosphate uridylyltransferase | ||
| 12 | 1.55 | Elongation factor 1-alpha | ||
| 13 | 1.65 | Betaine homocysteine methyltransferase | ||
| 14 | 1.61 | Betaine homocysteine methyltransferase | ||
| 15 | 1.52 | −4.58 | 2.01 | Adenosylhomocysteinase |
| 16 | −2.02 | Fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase | ||
| 17 | 1.53 | 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase | ||
| 18 | 1.63 | 1.32 | Isocitrate dehydrogenase | |
| 20 | 1.77 | 40S ribosomal protein SA | ||
| 22 | 2 | Malate dehydrogenase | ||
| 23 | −3.18 | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase | ||
| 24 | 1.79 | −1.91 | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase | |
| 27 | −2.08 | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase | ||
| 28 | −1.83 | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase | ||
| 29 | −2.08 | Malate dehydrogenase | ||
| Betaine homocysteine methyltransferase | ||||
| 30 | 1.64 | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase | ||
| 31 | −1.59 | −1.73 | Guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit beta-2 like 1 | |
| 33 | −2.06 | −1.62 | Prohibitin | |
| High choriolytic enzyme 1 | ||||
| 34 | −1.57 | 3-hydroxyanthranilate 34-dioxygenase | ||
| 36 | 1.69 | Betaine homocysteine methyltransferase | ||
| 37 | −1.08 | Apolipoprotein A-IV | ||
| 38 | 1.89 | Apolipoprotein A-I | ||
| 39 | 1.66 | Apolipoprotein A-I | ||
| 40 | 1.75 | Betaine homocysteine methyltransferase | ||
| 41 | −2.1 | 1.41 | Betaine homocysteine methyltransferase | |
| 42 | −2.34 | 1.55 | Peptidyl-prolyl cis-trans isomerase | |
| 43 | 1.9 | −2.17 | Fatty acid binding protein-like protein | |
| 44 | 1.7 | Alpha-2 globin | ||
| 45 | −1.35 | −4.35 | −1.95 | Alpha-1 globin |
| 46 | 2.02 | 1.59 | 14 KDa Apolipoprotein | |
| 47 | 1.77 | 14 KDa Apolipoprotein | ||
| Nucleoside disphosphate kinase | ||||
| 49 | −2.2 | −7.18 | −1.87 | Alpha-2 globin |
Spots are numbered according to Figure 3. Details on protein identification by mass spectrometry are reported in Additional file 2. Non-significant changes and spots that did not provide a valid protein identification are not reported.
Top scoring molecules according to IPA analysis obtained when comparing expression levels at T12 with expression levels at T0
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| A | Apolipoprotein A2 (APOA2) | 2.020 |
| Aldehyde Dehydrogenase (ADH5) | 2.000 | |
| Malate dehydrogenase (MDH) | 2.000 | |
| Fatty Acid Binding Protein 1 (FABP1) | 1.900 | |
| Apolipoprotein A1 (APOA1) | 1.890 | |
| Aldolase B (ALDOB) | 1.790 | |
| Ribosomal 40S subunit (RPSA) | 1.770 | |
| Betaine-homocysteine S-methyltransferase 1 (BHMT) | 1.750 | |
| 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPD) | 1.530 | |
| Adenosylhomocysteinase (AHCY) | 1.520 | |
| Fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase (FAH) | −2.020 | |
| Guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit beta-2-like 1 (GNB2L1) | −1.590 | |
| Alpha-1 globin (HBA1) | −1.350 | |
| B | Apolipoprotein A2 (APOA2) | 2.020 |
| Aldehyde Dehydrogenase (ADH5) | 2.000 | |
| Apolipoprotein A1 (APOA1) | 1.890 | |
| Alpha-amylase (AMY1A) | 1.830 | |
| Nucleoside-diphosphate kinase (NME4) | 1.770 | |
| Ribosomal 40S subunit (RPSA) | 1.770 | |
| UTP-glucose-1-phosphate uridylyltransferase (UGP2) | 1.740 | |
| Heat shock protein (HSPB1) | 1.700 | |
| Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) | 1.630 | |
| Elongation factor 1-alpha (EEF1A1) | 1.550 | |
| Adenosylhomocysteinase (AHCY) | −4.850 | |
| Alpha-1 globin (HBA1) | −4.350 | |
| Aldolase B (ALDOB) | −3.180 | |
| Fatty Acid Binding Protein 1 (FABP1) | −2.170 | |
| Betaine-homocysteine S-methyltransferase 1 (BHMT) | −2.100 | |
| Malate dehydrogenase (MDH1) | −2.080 | |
| Prohibitin (PHB) | −2.060 | |
| Guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit beta-2-like 1 (GNB2L1) | −1.730 | |
| C | Apolipoprotein A2 (APOA2) | 2.020 |
| Adenosylhomocysteinase (AHCY) | 2.010 | |
| Aldehyde Dehydrogenase (ADH5) | 2.000 | |
| Fatty Acid Binding Protein 1 (FABP1) | 1.900 | |
| Apolipoprotein A1 (APOA1) | 1.890 | |
| Aldolase B (ALDOB) | 1.790 | |
| Ribosomal 40S subunit (RPSA) | 1.770 | |
| Betaine-homocysteine S-methyltransferase 1 (BHMT) | 1.650 | |
| Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) | 1.320 | |
| Alpha-1 globin (HBA1) | −1.950 | |
| Apolipoprotein A4 (APOA4) | −1.800 | |
| Prohibitin (PHB) | −1.620 |
Figure 4Statistical analysis of 2D DIGE results obtained for fish serum. The figure illustrates the heat map (a) and the score plot (b) obtained upon comparison of the serum protein profiles of sea breams at T0 (blue) and after 12 weeks (T12) of feeding with Feeds A (pink), B (green), and C (dark red). In the heat map (a), each cell represents the differential protein expression trend, indicating increased expression in green and decreased expression in red. Clustering is performed according to the proteins (left dendrogram) and the sample (top dendrogram). In the score plot (b), sample clustering according to the principal component analysis is reported.
Serum protein expression trends observed for T12A, T12B, and T12C vs T0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
| ||
| 2 |
|
| ||
| 3 |
|
| ||
| 4 |
|
| ||
| 5 |
|
| 1.3 |
|
| 6 | 1.4 |
|
| |
| 7 |
|
| ||
| 8 |
| 1.3 | 1.3 |
|
| 9 |
|
|
Spots are numbered according to Figure 5. Spots with average ratios +/- 1.5 are indicated in bold. Details on protein identification by mass spectrometry are reported in Additional file 4.
Figure 5Representative 2D PAGE of gilthead sea bream serum proteins in the 3 to 11 pH range. Spots showing a differential abundance in T12A, T12B and T12C, and having a valid protein identification are circled in the map, and information on their changes and identities is reported in Table 5.
Figure 6Statistical analysis of 2D DIGE results. The figure illustrates the heat map (a) and the score plot (b) obtained upon comparison of the serum protein profiles of sea breams at T12A (pink) and T12B (green). In the heat map (a), each cell represents the differential protein expression trend, indicating increased expression in green and decreased expression in red. Clustering is performed according to the proteins (left dendrogram) and the sample (top dendrogram). In the score plot (b), sample clustering according to the principal component analysis is reported.
Figure 7Representative 2D PAGE of gilthead sea bream serum proteins in the 4 to 7 pH range. Spots showing a differential abundance in T12A and T12B and a valid protein identification are circled in the map, and information on their changes and identity is reported in Table 6.
Protein spots showing statistically significant differences in expression between T12A and T12B
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.59 | Complement component c3 |
| 2 | 3.14 | Alpha 1 antitrypsin |
| Warm temperature acclimation-related 65 kDa protein | ||
| 3 | 1.51 | Warm temperature acclimation-related 65 kDa protein |
| 4 | 2.96 | Warm temperature acclimation-related 65 kDa protein |
| Alpha 1 antitrypsin | ||
| 5 | 1.5 | Warm temperature acclimation-related 65 kDa protein |
| Alpha 1 antitrypsin | ||
| 6 | 1.87 | Alpha 1 antitrypsin |
| 7 | 3.86 | Alpha 1 antitrypsin |
| 8 | −1.86 | Transferrin (fragments) |
| 9 | −2.25 | Transferrin (fragments) |
| 10 | −2.72 | Fibrinogen beta chain |
| 11 | 1.93 | Apolipoprotein A-1 |
| 12 | 4.73 | Apolipoprotein A-1 |
| 13 | 4.19 | Apolipoprotein A-1 |
| 14 | 2.54 | Apolipoprotein A-IV4 |
| 15 | −3.3 | 14 kDa apolipoprotein |
| 16 | 1.57 | Transferrin |
| 17 | 1.57 | Transferrin |
| 18 | 2.49 | Transferrin |
| 19 | −1.77 | F-type lectin 2 |
| 20 | 2.14 | F-type lectin 2 |
Spots are numbered according to Figure 7. Details on protein identification by mass spectrometry are reported in Additional file 5.