| Literature DB >> 30256841 |
Shujin Wang1,2, Binxing Wang1,3, Huan He1,3, Aomin Sun2, Chunhua Guo1,3.
Abstract
The intestinal mucosal development of piglets (Sus scrofa) during the weaning stage is important to their disease susceptibility and later growth. Quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) is commonly used to screen for differentially expressed genes and, for accurate results, proper reference housekeeping genes are essential. Here we assessed the mRNA expression of 18 well-known candidate reference genes at different parts of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) of piglets during the weaning process by RT-qPCR assay. GeNorm analysis revealed that B2M/HMBS/HPRT1 were the three most stable reference genes and GAPDH was the least stable gene in the duodenum, jejunum, ileum, colon, and whole GIT. BestKeeper analysis found that B2M/HMBS/PGK11, HMBS/B2M/HPRT1, B2M/HMBS/HSPCB, B2M/HPRT1/HMBS, and B2M/HMBS/HPRT1 were the most stable genes in the duodenum, jejunum, ileum, colon, and whole GIT, respectively, whereas GAPDH, B-actin, and 18S rRNA were the least stable genes at different parts of the GIT. To confirm the crucial role of appropriate housekeeping genes in obtaining reliable results, we analyzed the expression of ALP using each of the 18 reference genes to normalize the RT-qPCR data. We found that the expression levels of ALP normalized using the most stable reference genes (B2M/HMBS/HPRT1) differed greatly from the expression levels obtained when the data were normalized using the least stable genes (GAPDH, B-actin, and 18S). We concluded that B2M/HMBS/HPRT1 were the optimal reference genes for gene expression analysis by RT-qPCR in the intestinal mucosal development stages of piglets at weaning. Our findings provide a set of porcine housekeeping reference genes for studies of mRNA expression in different parts of the pig intestine.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30256841 PMCID: PMC6157878 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204583
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Primers and relative information of the reference and target genes.
| Gene symbol | Primer sequence (5'-3') | Amplicon length (bp) | Tm(°C) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YWHAZ | 178 | 62 | Erkens et al. (2006) | |
| UBC | 82 | 58.4 | M18159 | |
| TBP | 124 | 55.9 | Erkens et al. (2006) | |
| RPL32 | 165 | 55 | NM_001001636 | |
| RPL19 | 82 | 62 | AF435591 | |
| PPIA | 175 | 62 | NM_214353 | |
| PPARGC1A | 107 | 59 | Muráni et al. (2007) | |
| PGK1 | 180 | 52.8 | NM_001099932 | |
| HSPCB | 131 | 55.9 | AF288819 | |
| CANX | 135 | 60 | Muráni et al. (2007) | |
| ALDOA | 142 | 55.6 | AY359812 | |
| 5S | 93 | 54 | AF329851 | |
| 18S | 125 | 53 | Wang et al.(2016) | |
| B2M | 161 | 60 | Wang et al.(2016) | |
| B-actin | 134 | 51 | Wang et al.(2016) | |
| GAPDH | 195 | 55.9 | AF017079 | |
| HMBS | 83 | 59.5 | Wang et al.(2016) | |
| HPRT | 91 | 59.5 | Wang et al.(2016) | |
| ALP | 105 | 55.9 | Lackeyram et al.(2010) | |
Sequencing results of genes using BLASTN from NCBI against nucleotide collection.
| Gene Name | Best hit in NCBI | Identity |
|---|---|---|
| YWHAZ | Sus scrofa 3-monooxygenase/tryptophan 5-monooxygenase activation protein, zeta (YWHAZ), transcript variant X1, mRNA | 100% |
| UBC | Sus scrofa ubiquitin C (UBC), transcript variant X3, mRNA | 98% |
| TBP | PREDICTED: Sus scrofa TATA box binding protein (TBP), mRNA | 95% |
| RPL32 | Sus scrofa ribosomal protein L32 (RPL32), mRNA | 97% |
| RPL19 | Sus scrofa ribosomal protein L19 (RPL19), mRNA | 96% |
| PPIA | PREDICTED: Sus scrofa peptidylprolyl isomerase A (cyclophilin A) (PPIA), transcript variant X2, mRNA | 99% |
| PPARGC1A | Sus scrofa PPARG coactivator 1 alpha (PPARGC1A), mRNA | 97% |
| PGK1 | Phosphoglycerate kinase 1 [Sus scrofa] | 100% |
| HSPCB | Sus scrofa heat shock 90kD protein 1, beta (HSPCB) Mrna | 96% |
| CANX | Sus scrofa calnexin (CANX), mRNA | 98% |
| ALDOA | Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A [Sus scrofa] | 96% |
| 5S | Human 5S ribosomal RNA gene | 98% |
| 18S | 99% | |
| B2M | Sus scrofa beta-2-microglobulin (B2M), mRNA | 99% |
| B-actin | Sus scrofa actin, beta (ACTB), mRNA | 98% |
| GAPDH | Sus scrofa glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), mRNA | 97% |
| HMBS | Sus scrofa hydroxymethylbilane synthase (HMBS), mRNA | 96% |
| HPRT1 | Sus scrofa hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase 1 (HPRT1), mRNA | 100% |
| ALP | Sus scrofa alkaline phosphatase, intestinal (ALPI), transcript variant 2, mRNA | 99% |
Fig 1Distribution of the CT values of the reference genes in the duodenum (A), jejunum (B), ileum (C), colon (D) and whole gastrointestinal tract (E) of piglets. The boxes encompass the 25th to the 75th percentiles. The middle line in a box marks the median. Whisker caps indicate the minimum and maximum values.
Fig 2Distribution of the CT values of the reference genes at different growth stages of the gastrointestinal tract.
The boxes encompass the 25th to the 75th percentiles. The middle line in a box marks the median. Whisker caps indicate the minimum and maximum values.
A comparison of CT values of the 18 reference genes at different GITs and growth stages.
| Gene | GIT | Age (Post-weaning) | SEM | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duodenum | Jejunum | Ileum | Colon | Day 0 | Day 7 | Day 14 | Day 21 | GIT | Age | GIT*Age | GIT | Age | GIT*Age | |
| 23.61 | 23.62 | 23.03 | 23.61 | 24.09 | 23.44 | 23.47 | 22.89 | 0.185 | 0.185 | 0.369 | 0.065 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| 20.07 | 20.01 | 19.69 | 20.61 | 19.62 | 20.26 | 20.63 | 19.86 | 0.189 | 0.189 | 0.379 | 0.010 | 0.002 | <0.001 | |
| 28.09 | 27.07 | 27.01 | 27.49 | 28.57 | 26.84 | 27.60 | 26.65 | 0.292 | 0.292 | 0.585 | 0.041 | <0.001 | 0.003 | |
| 18.73 | 18.46 | 18.87 | 18.05 | 18.11 | 18.33 | 19.29 | 18.38 | 0.302 | 0.302 | 0.605 | 0.237 | 0.037 | 0.062 | |
| 21.39 | 20.41 | 19.68 | 20.91 | 20.61 | 20.69 | 20.93 | 20.17 | 0.185 | 0.185 | 0.371 | <0.001 | 0.039 | <0.001 | |
| 23.27 | 22.76 | 22.75 | 22.29 | 23.73 | 23.29 | 21.84 | 22.20 | 0.332 | 0.332 | 0.664 | 0.232 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| 29.15 | 28.59 | 28.77 | 29.06 | 29.18 | 28.15 | 29.32 | 28.92 | 0.207 | 0.207 | 0.415 | 0.209 | 0.001 | <0.001 | |
| 24.57 | 23.48 | 22.53 | 23.69 | 23.19 | 23.63 | 24.21 | 23.23 | 0.217 | 0.217 | 0.435 | <0.001 | 0.004 | 0.001 | |
| 25.16 | 23.06 | 23.29 | 23.58 | 24.12 | 23.63 | 24.11 | 23.23 | 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.561 | <0.001 | 0.081 | <0.001 | |
| 25.93 | 25.46 | 25.3 | 25.57 | 25.90a | 25.15b | 26.28a | 24.93b | 0.259 | 0.259 | 0.518 | 0.361 | 0.001 | <0.001 | |
| 26.87 | 24.78 | 25.09 | 25.08 | 26.84 | 24.75 | 25.88 | 24.34 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.579 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| 22.09 | 21.12 | 22.19 | 23.52 | 22.41 | 21.68 | 22.01 | 22.83 | 0.252 | 0.252 | 0.503 | <0.001 | 0.012 | <0.001 | |
| 15.72 | 16.09 | 15.74 | 15.07 | 15.76 | 16.03 | 15.49 | 15.35 | 0.223 | 0.223 | 0.446 | 0.015 | 0.141 | <0.001 | |
| 15.78 | 15.67 | 15.53 | 15.74 | 15.92 | 15.72 | 15.47 | 15.61 | 0.092 | 0.064 | 0.103 | 0.333 | 0.102 | 0.081 | |
| 17.99 | 18.47 | 17.40b | 17.77 | 18.07 | 17.92 | 17.71 | 17.93 | 0.199 | 0.199 | 0.398 | 0.003 | 0.654 | 0.042 | |
| 24.96 | 27.23 | 25.22b | 23.82 | 27.33 | 24.49 | 22.95 | 26.46 | 0.648 | 0.648 | 1.296 | 0.004 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| 26.65 | 26.80 | 26.61 | 26.74 | 26.91 | 26.64 | 26.58 | 26.67 | 0.099 | 0.099 | 0.197 | 0.508 | 0.094 | 0.052 | |
| 25.61 | 24.73 | 24.53b | 24.83 | 25.22 | 24.98 | 24.71 | 24.79 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.22 | <0.001 | 0.007 | 0.001 | |
a,b,c Mean values within a row with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P< 0·05).
Fig 3Gene expression stability and ranking of the reference genes in the duodenum as calculated by GeNorm.
A) Rank order of gene expression stability based on average expression stability values (M) for the reference genes from least stable (left) to most stable (right). B) Pairwise variation analysis (V) to determine the optimal number of reference genes for RT-qPCR data normalization.
Fig 7Gene expression stability and rankings of the reference genes in the whole gastrointestinal tract as calculated by GeNorm.
A) Rank order of gene expression stability based on average expression stability values (M) for the reference genes from least stable (left) to most stable (right). B) Pairwise variation analysis (V) to determine the optimal number of reference genes for RT-qPCR data normalization.
Reference genes stability calculated by BestKeeper based on the CT.
| Gene | Coeff.of corr.[R] | Std dev[± CT] | Gene | Coeff.of corr.[R] | Std dev[± CT] | |
| B2M | 0.97 | 0.56 | HMBS | 0.87 | 0.59 | |
| HMBS | 0.92 | 0.83 | B2M | 0.81 | 0.32 | |
| PGK11 | 0.89 | 0.81 | HPRT1 | 0.62 | 0.74 | |
| HPRT1 | 0.87 | 0.55 | RPL19 | 0.62 | 0.68 | |
| UBC | 0.84 | 0.74 | B-actin | 0.52 | 0.99 | |
| RPL32 | 0.59 | 0.83 | PGK11 | 0.48 | 0.47 | |
| TBP | 0.57 | 0.47 | UBC | 0.46 | 0.99 | |
| RPL19 | 0.3 | 0.93 | YWHA | 0.1 | 0.77 | |
| B-actin | 0.16 | 0.56 | ||||
| Gene | Coeff.of corr.[R] | Std dev[± CT] | Gene | Coeff.of corr.[R] | Std dev[± CT] | |
| B2M | 0.82 | 0.52 | B2M | 0.79 | 0.52 | |
| HMBS | 0.82 | 0.59 | HPRT1 | 0.67 | 0.47 | |
| HSPCB | 0.77 | 0.55 | HMBS | 0.61 | 0.64 | |
| HPRT1 | 0.67 | 0.37 | RPL19 | 0.44 | 0.62 | |
| YWHA | 0.53 | 0.92 | PPARGGIA | 0.41 | 0.88 | |
| PGK11 | 0.24 | 0.61 | YWHA | 0.36 | 0.9 | |
| RPL19 | 0.23 | 0.82 | RPL32 | 0.32 | 0.59 | |
| 5S | 0.05 | 0.98 | ||||
| Gene | coeff. of corr. [r] | std dev [± CP] | ||||
| B2M | 0.78 | 0.50 | ||||
| HMBS | 0.70 | 0.43 | ||||
| HPRT1 | 0.59 | 0.59 | ||||
| UBC | 0.52 | 0.89 | ||||
| B-actin | 0.43 | 0.85 | ||||
| RPL32 | 0.43 | 0.94 | ||||
| YWHA | 0.40 | 0.98 | ||||
| RPL19 | 0.17 | 0.86 | ||||
Coeff. of corr. [R]: Pearson coefficient of correlation; Std dev [± CT]: the standard deviation of the CT.
Fig 8Effect of normalization on The expression of ALP was normalized to 18S, B-actin, HMBS, B2M and HPRT1 and the geometric mean of B2M/HMBS/HPRT1 expression and is shown relative to its expression at different post-weaning stages. Error bars indicate mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM).