| Literature DB >> 27619175 |
Leigh Boardman1, Jesper G Sørensen2, Vladimír Koštál3, Petr Šimek3, John S Terblanche1.
Abstract
Insect cold tolerance depends on their ability to withstand or repair perturbations in cellular homeostasis caused by low temperature stress. Decreased oxygen availability (hypoxia) can interact with low temperature tolerance, often improving insect survival. One mechanism proposed for such responses is that whole-animal cold tolerance is set by a transition to anaerobic metabolism. Here, we provide a test of this hypothesis in an insect model system (Thaumatotibia leucotreta) by experimental manipulation of oxygen availability while measuring metabolic rate, critical thermal minimum (CTmin), supercooling point and changes in 43 metabolites in moth larvae at three key timepoints (before, during and after chill coma). Furthermore, we determined the critical oxygen partial pressure below which metabolic rate was suppressed (c. 4.5 kPa). Results showed that altering oxygen availability did not affect (non-lethal) CTmin nor (lethal) supercooling point. Metabolomic profiling revealed the upregulation of anaerobic metabolites and alterations in concentrations of citric acid cycle intermediates during and after chill coma exposure. Hypoxia exacerbated the anaerobic metabolite responses induced by low temperatures. These results suggest that cold tolerance of T. leucotreta larvae is not set by oxygen limitation, and that anaerobic metabolism in these larvae may contribute to their ability to survive in necrotic fruit.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27619175 PMCID: PMC5020647 DOI: 10.1038/srep32856
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Critical thermal minima determined by thermolimit respirometry (TLR) under different PO2 conditions.
| O2 (kPa) | Visual CTmin | Mass (mg) | Activity CTmin (°C) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 38.69 ± 7.66(n = 8) | 7.33 ± 2.08(n = 8) | Undetectable(n = 4) | |
| 2.5 | 50.25 ± 6.88(n = 11) | 4.27 ± 0.78(n = 11) | 4.54 ± 1.00(n = 9) | |
| 5 | 43.53 ± 9.37(n = 8) | 3.82 ± 1.64(n = 6) | 3.93 ± 1.28(n = 8) | |
| 10 | 44.84 ± 9.48(n = 14) | 5.03 ± 0.49(n = 14) | 7.09 ± 1.48(n = 6) | |
| 21 | 6.7 ± 0.1(n = 19) | 40.31 ± 6.70(n = 13) | 5.45 ± 0.53(n = 12) | 5.10 ± 0.69(n = 9) |
| 40 | 44.99 ± 10.87(n = 12) | 4.65 ± 0.72(n = 12) | 5.80 ± 1.20(n = 5) | |
Data indicates mean ± S.E.M. Statistical results of comparison between oxygen groups are shown in the bottom row. Additional results in Table S1. CO2 CTmin and activity CTmin were calculated from the inflection point of regressions of the absolute difference sum (ADS) residuals (see methods).
*Critical thermal minimum (CTmin) data from Boardman et al.36.
Figure 1Critical oxygen partial pressure (Pcrit) (A) and coefficient of variation of CO2 (COV) (B) for T. leucotreta larvae was determined under a range of oxygen conditions at 15 °C. All 14 individuals were recorded at all six O2 conditions. Raw mean CO2 values are shown (A) and were used to calculate Pcrit. The blue and red lines and arrows indicate Pcrit as estimated from regression tree analysis and linear regressions respectively (see methods for details). Box and whisker plots of the COV data (B) show the general trend for a decrease in COV as PO2 decreases (regression: r = 0.55, P < 0.00001).
Summary of significant differences between timepoints (Time) within each oxygen treatment (O2).
| Group1 | O2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
| Group 2 | O2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 21 | 21 | 21 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
| Time | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | |
| Ala | • | • | * | * | • | • | |||||||||||||
| Arg | • | • | |||||||||||||||||
| Asn | * | * | • | • | * | • | • | ||||||||||||
| Asp | * | • | |||||||||||||||||
| 3-Ala | * | • | • | ||||||||||||||||
| Cys | • | * | • | ||||||||||||||||
| Glu | • | • | * | • | * | ||||||||||||||
| Gln | • | • | * | • | • | ||||||||||||||
| Gly | * | • | |||||||||||||||||
| His | |||||||||||||||||||
| Ile | • | • | • | • | • | ||||||||||||||
| Leu | • | • | • | * | * | • | |||||||||||||
| Lys | • | * | * | ||||||||||||||||
| Met | • | ||||||||||||||||||
| Orn | * | • | |||||||||||||||||
| Phe | * | * | * | ||||||||||||||||
| Pro | • | • | • | ||||||||||||||||
| Ser | * | * | • | * | * | ||||||||||||||
| Thr | |||||||||||||||||||
| Trp | • | • | • | ||||||||||||||||
| Tyr | |||||||||||||||||||
| Val | * | • | * | • | • | ||||||||||||||
| 2-Aminobutyric acid (2-Aba) | • | ||||||||||||||||||
| Cystathionine (CTH) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 3,4-Dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) | • | * | • | * | |||||||||||||||
| Glutathione (GSH) | * | • | |||||||||||||||||
| Aconitic acid | • | * | |||||||||||||||||
| 2-Ketoglutaric acid (2-KG) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Citric acid | • | * | • | ||||||||||||||||
| Fumaric acid | * | * | * | * | |||||||||||||||
| Malic acid | • | • | * | * | * | * | |||||||||||||
| Pyruvic acid | • | • | |||||||||||||||||
| Succinic acid | • | • | |||||||||||||||||
| Adipic acid | |||||||||||||||||||
| Lactic acid | * | * | • | • | • | ||||||||||||||
| Maleic acid | * | * | * | * | |||||||||||||||
| Linoleic acid | * | ||||||||||||||||||
| Linolenic acid | • | • | |||||||||||||||||
| Margaric acid | |||||||||||||||||||
| Oleic acid | • | ||||||||||||||||||
| Palmitic acid | * | ||||||||||||||||||
| Stearic acid | * | ||||||||||||||||||
| Putrescine | • | • | |||||||||||||||||
Time 1 is before chill coma, time 2 is during chill coma and time 3 is after chill coma. Significant effects (P < 0.0037 after false discovery rate correction using the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure75) are indicated by symbols. The level of significance is indicated by the symbols: blank is P > 0.0037, dot (•) is 0.0037>P > 0.001, and star (*) is P < 0.001.
Figure 2Results of metabolic profiling at each of the three timepoints sampled: before- (top row), during- (middle row) and after (bottom row) chill coma.
2D score plots (A,D,G) showing the projection of samples onto the first discriminant plane for each of the three timepoints. Each point is a sample (four individuals pooled), colours represent different oxygen treatments (red: 0 kPa O2, green: 2.5 kPa O2, blue: 5 kPa O2, turquoise: 10 kPa O2, pink: 21 kPa O2, yellow: 40 kPa O2) and lines indicate 95% confidence intervals. The variable importance plots (B,E,H), based on VIP scores, shows the top 15 variables that contribute to component 1 at each of the timepoints (based on Pearson correlation). The coloured boxes on the right indicate the relative concentrations of each of the metabolites in each oxygen treatment, with reds indicating highest concentrations and greens the lowest concentrations. Pattern finding analysis (C,F,I) at each timepoint sampled shows the top 25 metabolites that correlated with the increase in oxygen treatments (i.e. from 0 to 40 kPa O2). Metabolites in red are positively correlated with the increase in oxygen (i.e. highest concentrations at highest oxygen), while those in blue were negatively correlated (i.e. highest concentrations at lowest oxygen). Note that these results do not necessarily denote significance. Significant differences between oxygen treatments within each timepoint can be found in Table S3. Refer to Table S2 for compound abbreviations.
Summary of the metabolic pathways that were altered by oxygen availability during chill coma.
| Pathway | Number of hits (total cmpd) | Hits (KEGG ID) | Hits | Holm adjusted | FDR | Impact | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 (67) | C00025 | L-Glutamic acid | 0.000 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.138 | |
| C00037 | Glycine | ||||||
| C00041 | L-Alanine | ||||||
| C00047 | L-Lysine | ||||||
| C00049 | L-Aspartic acid | ||||||
| C00062 | L-Arginine | ||||||
| C00064 | L-Glutamine | ||||||
| C00065 | L-Serine | ||||||
| C00073 | L-Methionine | ||||||
| C00078 | L-Tryptophan | ||||||
| C00079 | L-Phenylalanine | ||||||
| C00082 | L-Tyrosine | ||||||
| C00123 | L-Leucine | ||||||
| C00135 | L-Histidine | ||||||
| C00148 | L-Proline | ||||||
| C00152 | L-Asparagine | ||||||
| C00183 | L-Valine | ||||||
| C00188 | L-Threonine | ||||||
| C00407 | L-Isoleucine | ||||||
| 5 (26) | C00025 | L-Glutamic acid | 0.000 | 0.012 | 0.004 | 0.494 | |
| C00037 | Glycine | ||||||
| C00051 | Glutathione | ||||||
| C00077 | Ornithine | ||||||
| C00134 | Putrescine | ||||||
| 5 (25) | C00022 | Pyruvic acid | 0.000 | 0.013 | 0.004 | 0.571 | |
| C00037 | Glycine | ||||||
| C00065 | L-Serine | ||||||
| C00188 | L-Threonine | ||||||
| C02291 | L-Cystathione | ||||||
| 4 (7) | C00025 | L-Glutamic acid | 0.001 | 0.031 | 0.006 | 0.000 | |
| C00037 | Glycine | ||||||
| C00064 | L-Glutamine | ||||||
| C02291 | L-Cystathionine | ||||||
| 2 (6) | C00037 | Glycine | 0.001 | 0.035 | 0.006 | 0.000 | |
| C00065 | L-Serine | ||||||
| 8 (37) | C00025 | L-Glutamic acid | 0.001 | 0.035 | 0.006 | 0.528 | |
| C00049 | L-Aspartic acid | ||||||
| C00062 | L-Arginine | ||||||
| C00064 | L-Glutamine | ||||||
| C00077 | Ornithine | ||||||
| C00122 | Fumaric acid | ||||||
| C00134 | Putrescine | ||||||
| C00148 | L-Proline | ||||||
| 4 (25) | C00022 | Pyruvic acid | 0.001 | 0.044 | 0.006 | 0.227 | |
| C00065 | L-Serine | ||||||
| C00073 | L-Methionine | ||||||
| C02291 | L-Cystathione |
Raw P-values are calculated from the enrichment analysis and significance is based on significant Holm-adjusted P-values, and the table is ranked by these values (only significant pathways are shown, P < 0.05). Pathway impact values are calculated from pathway topology analysis and indicate where changes in the metabolites are more likely to have a greater impact on the pathway based on the location of the metabolite within the pathway. FDR - false discovery rate.