| Literature DB >> 26801403 |
Haibo Liu1, Yet T Nguyen2,3, Dan Nettleton4, Jack C M Dekkers5, Christopher K Tuggle6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improving feed efficiency (FE) of pigs by genetic selection is of economic and environmental significance. An increasingly accepted measure of feed efficiency is residual feed intake (RFI). Currently, the molecular mechanisms underlying RFI are largely unknown. Additionally, to incorporate RFI into animal breeding programs, feed intake must be recorded on individual pigs, which is costly and time-consuming. Thus, convenient and predictive biomarkers for RFI that can be measured at an early age are greatly desired. In this study, we aimed to explore whether differences exist in the global gene expression profiles of peripheral blood of 35 to 42 day-old pigs with extremely low (more efficient) and high RFI (less efficient) values from two lines that were divergently selected for RFI during the grow-finish phase, to use such information to explore the potential molecular basis of RFI differences, and to initiate development of predictive biomarkers for RFI.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26801403 PMCID: PMC4724083 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-016-2395-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Fig. 1Distribution of RFI values and sample selection for RNA-seq and RT-qPCR assays. Post-weaning blood samples of 16 pigs (8 per diet) with extremely low RFI from gilts of the low RFI line (LRFI) and 16 pigs (8 per diet) with extremely high RFI from gilts of the high RFI line (HRFI) fed the high-fiber, low-energy diet (HFD) or the low-fiber, high-energy diet (LFD) were selected for RNA-seq. One sample in the LRFI-LFD group was excluded from RNA sequencing because of low quality RNA, leaving a total of 31 samples for RNA-seq. The green and red dots represent individuals selected for RNA-seq. Twelve samples from each line by diet combination were selected for RT-qPCR validation of DEGs such that the corresponding RFI phenotypes were representative. The red and blue dots represent the samples selected for RT-qPCR assays. The 24 novel blood samples were selected such that the RFI values of the corresponding animals were roughly evenly distributed across the ranges of RFI not covered by the RFI phenotypes of the 24 animals originally selected for RNA-seq. The distribution of RFI values of barrows from each line by diet combination is also shown for reference
The number of differentially expressed genes identified at different q-value and fold change cutoffs
| Cutoff of | Cutoff of fold change | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| │log2(FC)│ > 0 a | │log2(FC)│ ≥ log2 1.5 | │log2(FC)│ ≥ 1 | |
|
| 454 | 140 | 50 |
|
| 1185 | 266 | 80 |
|
| 1972 | 344 | 93 |
aFC, fold change calculated as the ratio of mean gene expression in the low RFI group to mean gene expression in the high RFI group after accounting for the other relevant variables (see Methods)
Fig. 2Differentially expressed genes and transcriptomic differences between the low and high RFI groups. a Heatmap showing 454 DEGs (q ≤ 0.05) between low and high RFI groups identified by RNA-seq. Sample names are designated as RFI line followed by the pig identifier. LRFI, low RFI line; HRFI, high RFI line. Animals with sample names in blue were fed the high-fiber, low-energy diet (LFD), while animals with sample names in black were fed the low-fiber, high-energy diet (HFD). The relative orders of genes and samples were determined by two-way hierarchical clustering based on the adjusted transformed gene expression of the 454 DEGs. The adjusted gene expression was gene-wise standardized to get the z-score as displayed. b Volcano plot showing the magnitude and significance of differential expression of genes between low and high RFI groups. Black vertical dash lines correspond to │log2(fold change)│ = 1, while red horizontal dash line correspond to q-value of 0.15. FC, fold change calculated as the ratio of mean gene expression in the low RFI group to mean gene expression in the high RFI group after accounting for the other relevant variables. c Hierarchical clustering showing relationship of the 31 RNA-seq samples. The samples were hierarchically clustered by using Ward method with 1 minus Spearman correlation as distance. The Spearman correlations between pairs of samples were calculated based on the adjusted transformed expression of the 12280 genes
GO terms overrepresented among differentially expressed genes
| ID | Domain | Term | Annotateda | Significantb | Expectedc |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GO terms overrepresented among DEGs with higher expression in the low RFI group than in the high RFI group | ||||||
| GO:0044283 | BP | Small molecule biosynthetic process | 170 | 33 | 13.77 | 1.70E-06 |
| GO:0046394 | BP | Carboxylic acid biosynthetic process | 113 | 22 | 9.15 | 8.70E-05 |
| GO:0016053 | BP | Organic acid biosynthetic process | 113 | 22 | 9.15 | 8.70E-05 |
| GO:0006694 | BP | Steroid biosynthetic process | 44 | 12 | 3.56 | 0.00014 |
| GO:0046165 | BP | Alcohol biosynthetic process | 48 | 12 | 3.89 | 0.00033 |
| GO:0002474 | BP | Antigen processing and presentation of peptide antigen via MHC class I | 20 | 7 | 1.62 | 0.00067 |
| GO:1901617 | BP | Organic hydroxy compound biosynthetic process | 60 | 13 | 4.86 | 0.00084 |
| GO:0004298 | MF | Threonine-type endopeptidase activity | 15 | 9 | 1.18 | 3.50E-07 |
| GO:0005839 | CC | Proteasome core complex | 15 | 9 | 1.23 | 5.10E-07 |
| GO:0000502 | CC | Proteasome complex | 39 | 14 | 3.2 | 1.20E-06 |
| GO:0005739 | CC | Mitochondrion | 955 | 116 | 78.35 | 4.60E-06 |
| GO:0005689 | CC | U12-type spliceosomal complex | 17 | 8 | 1.39 | 2.50E-05 |
| GO:0043227 | CC | Membrane-bounded organelle | 5518 | 491 | 452.73 | 0.00039 |
| GO:0032991 | CC | Macromolecular complex | 2416 | 237 | 198.23 | 0.00041 |
| GO terms overrepresented among DEGs with lower expression in the low RFI group than in the high RFI group | ||||||
| GO:0065007 | BP | Biological regulation | 4577 | 285 | 237.14 | 1.10E-06 |
| GO:0050789 | BP | Regulation of biological process | 4395 | 272 | 227.71 | 7.00E-06 |
| GO:0007165 | BP | Signal transduction | 2117 | 149 | 109.68 | 9.70E-06 |
| GO:0030282 | BP | Bone mineralization | 45 | 11 | 2.33 | 1.30E-05 |
| GO:0023052 | BP | Signaling | 2276 | 156 | 117.92 | 2.50E-05 |
| GO:0044700 | BP | Single organism signaling | 2276 | 156 | 117.92 | 2.50E-05 |
| GO:0007166 | BP | Cell surface receptor signaling pathway | 979 | 79 | 50.72 | 2.90E-05 |
| GO:0031214 | BP | Biomineral tissue development | 49 | 11 | 2.54 | 3.10E-05 |
| GO:0050794 | BP | Regulation of cellular process | 4126 | 254 | 213.77 | 4.40E-05 |
| GO:0007154 | BP | Cell communication | 2328 | 157 | 120.61 | 5.70E-05 |
| GO:0042325 | BP | Regulation of phosphorylation | 525 | 48 | 27.2 | 7.10E-05 |
| GO:0016310 | BP | Phosphorylation | 1024 | 80 | 53.05 | 8.10E-05 |
| GO:0044763 | BP | Single-organism cellular process | 5419 | 315 | 280.76 | 0.00021 |
| GO:0018212 | BP | Peptidyl-tyrosine modification | 125 | 17 | 6.48 | 0.00023 |
| GO:0001932 | BP | Regulation of protein phosphorylation | 407 | 38 | 21.09 | 0.00027 |
| GO:0006468 | BP | Protein phosphorylation | 774 | 62 | 40.1 | 0.0003 |
| GO:0051716 | BP | Cellular response to stimulus | 2670 | 171 | 138.33 | 0.00041 |
| GO:0060070 | BP | Canonical Wnt signaling pathway | 86 | 13 | 4.46 | 0.00044 |
| GO:0016477 | BP | Cell migration | 405 | 37 | 20.98 | 0.0005 |
| GO:0051239 | BP | Regulation of multicellular organismal process | 841 | 65 | 43.57 | 0.00056 |
| GO:0018108 | BP | Peptidyl-tyrosine phosphorylation | 123 | 16 | 6.37 | 0.00058 |
| GO:2000026 | BP | Regulation of multicellular organismal development | 526 | 44 | 27.25 | 0.00099 |
| GO:0040011 | BP | Locomotion | 511 | 43 | 26.48 | 0.00101 |
| GO:0060089 | MF | Molecular transducer activity | 409 | 41 | 21.42 | 4.30E-05 |
| GO:0044459 | CC | Plasma membrane part | 537 | 45 | 27.48 | 0.00063 |
aNumber of genes detected in the blood and associated with a given GO term
bNumber of DEGs associated with a given GO term
cExpected number of DEGs associated with a given GO term
Fig. 3Validation of DEGs by RT-qPCR. 24 of the 37 selected DEGs between low and high RFI groups were confirmed by RT-qPCR when using the 48 samples, 24 of which were used for RNA-seq and another 24 of which were novel, as shown in this figure (q ≤ 0.15); 22 of the 37 selected DEGs were confirmed by RT-qPCR when using the 24 samples that were used for RNA-seq (q ≤ 0.15); but only 9 of the 37 selected DEGs were validated by RT-qPCR when using the 24 novel samples (q ≤ 0.15) (Addition file 9: Table S7). For comparison, the log2 (fold change) of these genes determined by RNA-seq were also displayed. Genes were ordered based on their log2 (fold change) as determined by RT-qPCR for display. Error bars for RT-qPCR assays show the standard errors of mean log2 (fold change). DEGs not confirmed by RT-qPCR are labeled in red. Genes without corresponding human orthologs are labeled with the last 5 digits of their Ensembl gene IDs, with common prefix “ENSSSCG000000” omitted for simplicity. For example, the ID for “29500” should be ENSSSCG00000029500
Summary of WGCNA modules differentially expressed between the low and high RFI groups
| ID | Size | Reg. coef.a |
| Adjusted R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1_ lightcyan | 198 | −0.33 | 4.7E-13 | 0.83 |
| C2_darkturquoise | 142 | 0.30 | 2.9E-09 | 0.70 |
| C3_ skyblue3 | 89 | 0.29 | 2.7E-08 | 0.65 |
| C4_ black | 786 | −0.28 | 3.9E-07 | 0.58 |
aReg. coef., regression coefficient estimated by regressing the expression level of the eigengene of a module on RFI groups, with the high RFI group as the reference
Fig. 4Co-expression modules differentially expressed between the low and high RFI group. a Distribution of eigengenes of modules highly associated with RFI groups. b Venn diagram showing overlapping between module genes and DEGs