| Literature DB >> 28865488 |
Junji Ohnishi1,2, Satoshi Ayuzawa3,4, Seiji Nakamura5, Shigeko Sakamoto6, Miyo Hori6, Tomoko Sasaoka4, Eriko Takimoto-Ohnishi6,7, Masakazu Tanatsugu8, Kazuo Murakami6,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggests that spiritual/religious involvement may have beneficial effects on both psychological and physical functions. However, the biological basis for this relationship remains unclear. This study explored the role of spiritual/religious involvement across a wide range of biological markers, including transcripts and metabolites, associated with the psychological aspects of empathy in Buddhist priests.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28865488 PMCID: PMC5581455 DOI: 10.1186/s40246-017-0117-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hum Genomics ISSN: 1473-9542 Impact factor: 4.639
Up-expressed genes in the priests
| Up genes | Enterz Gene ID | Gene name | Fold change |
| FDR | Average raw |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MX1 | 4599 | MX dyn amin-like GTPase 1 | 2.00 | 5.7E − 05 | 0.0352 | 4503 |
| IFI27 | 3429 | Interferon-α-inducible protein 27 | 2.60 | 9.9E − 08 | 0.0003 | 1990 |
| MYOM2 | 9172 | Myomesin 2 | 1.84 | 6.6E − 08 | 0.0003 | 1957 |
| IFIT3 | 3437 | Interferon-induced protein with tetratricopeptide repeats 3 | 1.77 | 7.7E − 05 | 0.0410 | 1890 |
| IFIT1 | 3434 | Interferon-induced protein with tetratricopeptide repeats 1 | 2.20 | 5.8E − 06 | 0.0073 | 1682 |
| RSAD2 | 91,543 | Radical S-adenosyl methionine domain containing 2 | 2.99 | < E − 09 | 0.0000 | 1347 |
| FOLR3 | 2352 | Folate receptor 3 (γ) | 1.82 | 1.3E − 05 | 0.0129 | 1079 |
| BTNL3 | 10,917 | Butyrophilin-like 3 | 2.23 | < E − 09 | 0.0000 | 880 |
| DEFA4 | 1669 | Defensin, α4, Corticostatin | 2.09 | 2.1E − 06 | 0.0034 | 824 |
| IFI44L | 10,964 | Interferon-induced protein 44-like | 2.58 | 2.0E − 07 | 0.0005 | 726 |
| BATF2 | 116,071 | Basic leucine zipper transcription factor, ATF-like 2 | 1.54 | 8.7E − 05 | 0.0448 | 540 |
| C4BPA | 722 | Complement component 4 binding protein, α | 2.14 | 6.6E − 08 | 0.0003 | 353 |
| CTSG | 1511 | Cathepsin G | 1.73 | 7.2E − 05 | 0.0395 | 301 |
| HERC5 | 51,191 | HECT and RLD domain containing E3 ubiquitin protein ligase 5 | 2.05 | 2.0E − 05 | 0.0174 | 266 |
| S100B | 6285 | S100 calcium binding protein B | 1.52 | 4.5E − 05 | 0.0305 | 195 |
| ARPC5 | 10,092 | Actin related protein 2/3 complex, subunit 5, 16 kDa | 1.66 | 2.4E − 05 | 0.0193 | 120 |
| LOC 728715 | 728,715 | Ovostatin homolog 2-like | 2.75 | 3.3E − 07 | 0.0008 | 72 |
| LOC 100509445 | 100,509,445 | Uncharacterized LOC100509445 | 4.29 | < E − 09 | 0.0000 | 67 |
Representative list of genes up-expressed (> 1.5-fold) in priests compared to the controls. The described data is in descending ordered of the average raw signals (> 50) in the priests’ group microarray data. MX1, IFI27, IFIT1, IFIT3, RSAD2, IFI44L, and HERC5 have been validated by quantitative real-time PCR (Fig. 1)
Down-expressed genes in the priests
| Down genes | Enterz Gene ID | Gene name | Fold change |
| FDR | Average raw |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HBG1 | 3047 | Hemoglobin, γA | 0.40 | 6.6E − 08 | 0.0003 | 93,019 |
| KRTAP 10-12 | 386,685 | Keratin associated protein 10–12 | 0.65 | 1.7E − 05 | 0.0146 | 49,880 |
| NPPA | 4878 | Natriuretic peptide A | 0.64 | 4.0E − 05 | 0.0254 | 17,657 |
| BPIFB2 | 80,341 | BPI fold containing family B, member 2 | 0.60 | 2.6E − 05 | 0.0196 | 14,002 |
| TUBB2A | 7280 | Tubulin, β2A class IIa | 0.58 | 2.7E − 06 | 0.0055 | 8610 |
| S100P | 6286 | S100 Ca2+ binding protein P | 0.43 | 6.6E − 08 | 0.0003 | 5677 |
| G3BP1 | 10,146 | GTPase activating protein (SH3 domain) binding protein 1 | 0.66 | 2.9E − 05 | 0.0207 | 4888 |
| NCR3 | 259,197 | Natural cytotoxicity triggering receptor 3 | 0.58 | 9.8E − 05 | 0.0375 | 1941 |
| SIGLEC14 | 100,049,587 | Sialic acid Ig-like lectin 14 | 0.05 | < E − 09 | 0.0000 | 1625 |
| LAIR2 | 3904 | Leukocyte-associated immunoglobulin-like receptor 2 | 0.62 | 7.1E − 05 | 0.0312 | 510 |
| IGF2 | 3481 | Insulin-like growth factor 2 | 0.57 | 7.4E − 05 | 0.0314 | 378 |
| LOC 102467076 | 102,467,076 | Uncharacterized LOC102467076 | 0.49 | 6.6E − 08 | 0.0004 | 347 |
| RNF182 | 221,687 | Ring finger protein 182 | 0.40 | 1.3E − 07 | 0.0000 | 140 |
| C17orf97 | 400,566 | Ligand of arginyltransferase 1 (LIAT1) | 0.26 | < E − 09 | 0.0000 | 121 |
| C8orf17 | 100,507,249 | Chromosome 8 open reading frame 17 | 0.40 | 1.6E − 05 | 0.0148 | 91 |
| TEKT2 | 27,285 | Tektin 2 (testicular) | 0.59 | 5.3E − 05 | 0.0284 | 66 |
| KCNJ18 | 100,134,444 | Potassium inwardly rectifying channel subfamily J, member 18 | 0.65 | 3.6E − 05 | 0.0237 | 61 |
| MDGA1 | 266,727 | MAM domain containing glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchor 1 | 0.47 | 2.3E − 07 | 0.0007 | 54 |
Representative list of genes up-expressed (< 0.66-fold) in priests comparing to the controls. The described data is in descending ordered of the average raw signals (> 50) in the priests’ group microarray data. C17orf97 has been validated by quantitative real-time PCR (Fig. 1)
Fig. 1The dot plots of the representative transcriptional markers identified in the priests. Dots represent subjects (circle, priests; square, controls), and line represents median. Eight genes were selected for validation by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). qRT-PCR data are normalized to the housekeeping gene GAPDH. Differences of each transcript were compared using a Mann–Whitney U test, indicating P value and the effect size r. a MX1 (P = 0.0015, r = − 0.676), b IFI27 (P = 0.0115, r = − 0.558), c IFIT1 (P = 0.0433, r = − 0.456), d IFIT3 (P = 0.0115, r = − 0.558), e RSAD2 (P = 0.0068, r = − 0.592), f IFI44L (P = 0.0433, r = − 0.456), g HERC5 (P = 0.0029, r = − 0.642), and h C17orf97 (P = 0.0089, r = − 0.583). Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. Cohen’s guidelines for the effect sizes (r) for Mann–Whitney U test are that a large effect is 0.5, a medium effect is 0.3, and small effect is 0.1 [28]
Fourteen metabolite profiling in the priests
| Metabolites | Priests ( | Control ( | Fold change |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methionine | 5.2E − 03 (4.7–6.0) E − 03 | 3.7E − 03 (3.1–4.1) E − 03 | 1.43 |
| − 0.761 |
| 3-Aminoisobutyric acid (BAIBA) | 10.0E − 04 (9.6–13.7) E − 04 | 2.5E − 04 (2.0–5.4) E − 04 | 3.06 |
| − 0.676 |
| Phenylalanine | 2.7E − 02 (2.4–3.0) E − 02 | 2.2E − 02 (2.1–2.3) E − 02 | 1.36 | 0.0029 | − 0.642 |
| Choline | 8.1E − 03 (7.5–10.2) E − 03 | 6.7E − 03 (5.6–7.3) E − 03 | 1.38 | 0.0052 | − 0.608 |
| SDMA (symmetric dimethylarginine) | 2.2E − 04 (2.0–2.3) E − 04 | 2.0E − 04 (1.6–2.0) E − 04 | 1.20 | 0.010 | − 0.563 |
| 2-Aminoadipic acid | 3.3E − 04 (2.9–3.8) E − 04 | 2.0E − 04 (1.7–2.4) E − 03 | 1.45 | 0.012 | − 0.558 |
| 2-Aminobutyric acid (AABA) | 8.7E − 03 (7.6–10.7) E − 03 | 6.8E − 03 (5.9–7.3) E − 03 | 1.38 | 0.019 | − 0.524 |
| ADMA (asymmetric dimethylarginine) | 1.8E − 04 (1.6–2.2) E − 04 | 1.5E − 04 (1.4–1.7) E − 04 | 1.20 | 0.025 | − 0.507 |
| Valine | 10.3E − 02 (9.4–10.9) E − 02 | 9.0E − 02 (8.6–10.5) E − 02 | 1.09 | 0.023 | − 0.507 |
| AC(13:1) | 5.9E − 05 (4.5–10.3) E − 05 | 3.2E − 05 (2.2–4.3) E − 05 | 1.79 | 0.027 | − 0.491 |
| Creatinine | 1.3E − 02 (1.0–2.0) E − 02 | 0.9E − 02 (0.8–1.1) E − 02 | 1.64 | 0.030 | − 0.483 |
| Leucine | 7.8E − 02 (7.5–9.2) E − 02 | 7.1E − 02 (6.8–7.8) E − 02 | 1.14 | 0.036 | − 0.473 |
| Histidine | 2.3E − 02 (2.1–2.4) E − 02 | 2.0E − 02 (1.7–2.3) E − 02 | 1.10 | 0.043 | − 0.456 |
| Isoleucine | 4.5E − 02 (4.2–5.2) E − 02 | 3.8E − 02 (3.4–4.4) E − 02 | 1.21 | 0.043 | − 0.456 |
Values are expressed as median and interquartile range (25–75th percentile). A P value < 0.05 is statistically significant by Mann–Whitney U test. A P value < 0.05 is statistically significant by Mann–Whitney U test. Cohen’s guidelines for the effect sizes (r) for Mann–Whitney U test are that a large effect is 0.5, a medium effect is 0.3, and small effect is 0.1 [28]
Fig. 2Representative four plasma metabolite markers identified in the priests. Dots represent subjects (circle, priests; square, controls), and line represents median. a Methionine in plasma of priests vs. the controls (P = 0.0002, r = − 0.761). b 3-Aminoisobutyric acid (BAIBA) in plasma of priests vs. the controls (P = 0.0015, r = − 0.676). c Phenylalanine in plasma of priests vs. the controls (P = 0.0029, r = − 0.642). d Choline in plasma of priests vs. the controls (P = 0.0052, r = − 0.608). Plasma level of each metabolite was shown as the relative area value calculated for metabolomics analysis by the Human Metabolome Technologies, Inc. The relative area value was defined as the relative concentration of each metabolite. Differences of each plasma metabolites were compared using a Mann–Whitney U test, indicating P value and the effect size r. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. Cohen’s guidelines for the effect sizes (r) for Mann–Whitney U test are that a large effect is 0.5, a medium effect is 0.3, and small effect is 0.1 [28]
Empathy scores in priests and the controls
| Psychology | Priests ( | Control ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sharing positive emotions with others | 22.0 (18.0–24.0) | 18.0 (15.0–20.0) | 0.018 | − 0.521 |
| Good feeling for others’ positive emotions | 22.0 (19.8–25.0) | 20.0 (17.8–21.0) | 0.029 | − 0.487 |
| Sharing negative emotions with others | 18.5 (17.8–20.3) | 16.0 (13.8–19.0) | 0.039 | − 0.462 |
| Sympathy for others’ negative emotions | 20.5 (19.5–23.5) | 20.0 (18.8–20.0) | 0.118 | − 0.368 |
| Sensibility about others’ emotions | 22.0 (20.0–25.0) | 18.5 (17.0–23.0) | 0.042 | 0.455 |
| Perspective taking | 20.5 (18.5–25.0) | 19.0 (17.3–20.0) | 0.106 | 0.368 |
Values are expressed as median and interquartile range (25–75th percentile). A P value < 0.05 is statistically significant by Mann–Whitney U test. Cohen’s guidelines for the effect sizes (r) for Mann–Whitney U test are that a large effect is 0.5, a medium effect is 0.3, and small effect is 0.1 [28]
Bivariate correlations (Spearman’s ρ) between the transcriptional markers and metabolite markers
| Transcriptional marker vs. metabolite marker |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| C17orf97 vs. 3-amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) | − 0.636 | 0.026 |
| RSAD2 vs. 3-amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) | 0.571 | 0.008 |
| HERC5 vs. 3-amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) | 0.559 | 0.010 |
| MX1 vs. 3-amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) | 0.556 | 0.011 |
| IFIT3 vs. 3-amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) | 0.516 | 0.020 |
| IFIT1 vs. 3-amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) | 0.501 | 0.025 |
| MX1 vs. methionine | 0.538 | 0.014 |
| IFI27 vs. methionine | 0.492 | 0.028 |
| MX1 vs. phenylalanine | 0.480 | 0.032 |
Bivariate correlations (Spearman’s ρ) between the transcriptional markers and empathy sub-dimension scores
| Transcriptional marker vs. empathy |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| HERC5 vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.595 | 0.006 |
| RSAD2 vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.537 | 0.015 |
| MX1 vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.511 | 0.019 |
| IFIT3 vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.483 | 0.031 |
| IFI44L vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.479 | 0.033 |
| C17orf97 vs. sharing positive emotions with others | − 0.459 | 0.042 |
| C17orf97 vs. good feeling for other’s positive emotions | − 0.528 | 0.017 |
| IFIT3 vs. sharing negative emotions with others | 0.603 | 0.005 |
| IFIT1 vs. sharing negative emotions with others | 0.569 | 0.009 |
| IFI44L vs. sharing negative emotions with others | 0.536 | 0.015 |
| HERC5 vs. sharing negative emotions with others | 0.487 | 0.030 |
| RSAD2 vs. sharing negative emotions with others | 0.448 | 0.047 |
| IFIT3 vs. sensibility about other’s emotions | 0.496 | 0.026 |
| HERC5 vs. sensibility about other’s emotions | 0.470 | 0.037 |
Bivariate correlations (Spearman’s ρ) between the metabolite markers and empathy sub-dimension scores
| Metabolite marker vs. empathy |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 3-Amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.700 | 0.001 |
| Asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.602 | 0.005 |
| Symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.561 | 0.010 |
| Methionine vs. sharing positive emotions with others | 0.477 | 0.033 |
| Symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) vs. good feeling for other’s positive emotions | 0.649 | 0.002 |
| Asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) vs. good feeling for other’s positive emotions | 0.569 | 0.009 |
| Histidine vs. good feeling for other’s positive emotions | 0.491 | 0.028 |
| 3-Amino isobutyric acid (BAIBA) vs. good feeling for other’s positive emotions | 0.455 | 0.044 |
| Creatinine vs. sensitivity about other’s emotions | 0.573 | 0.008 |
Fig. 3Scatter plots of representative correlation between the molecular markers identified in the priests and empathy. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were calculated. Dots represent subjects (circle, priests; square, controls). a C17orf97 transcript vs. 3-aminoisobutyric acid (BAIBA) metabolite (ρ = − 0.636). b IFIT3 transcript vs. empathy aspect “Sharing negative emotions with others” (ρ = 0.603). c 3-Aminoisobutyric acid (BAIBA) metabolite vs. empathy aspect “Sharing positive emotions with others” (ρ = 0.700)