Olga A Snytnikova1,2, Anastasiya A Khlichkina3,4, Renad Z Sagdeev3, Yuri P Tsentalovich5,6. 1. International Tomography Center SB RAS, Institutskaya 3a, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. snytnikova_olga@tomo.nsc.ru. 2. Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova 2, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. snytnikova_olga@tomo.nsc.ru. 3. International Tomography Center SB RAS, Institutskaya 3a, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. 4. Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova 2, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. 5. International Tomography Center SB RAS, Institutskaya 3a, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. yura@tomo.nsc.ru. 6. Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova 2, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia. yura@tomo.nsc.ru.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Quantification of metabolites in biological fluids and tissues by NMR spectroscopy is challenged by the presence of abundant macromolecules and lipoproteins in samples, which give broad signals in the NMR spectra. To improve the quality of NMR spectra the different protocols for protein and lipid removal from the sample are used. OBJECTIVES: This work is aimed at the evaluation of the effectiveness of various methods of purification of blood serum from proteins and lipids for 1H NMR metabolomic profiling. METHODS: The advantages and limitations of different methods of the sample preparation for NMR-based quantitative metabolomics have been compared, including ultrafiltration, methanol and ethanol extractions with and without additional lipid removal, and methanol-chloroform extraction. RESULTS: The concentrations of 30 abundant metabolites extracted from human blood serum have been measured. It is found that ultrafiltration provides the best lipid removal, but causes significant and inhomogeneous metabolite losses. Ethanol and methanol extractions demonstrate similar performance with the minimal metabolite losses, and are ideal for fluids and tissues with low lipid content. The additional purification of alcohol extracts from lipids allows for the significant improving of NMR spectra, but causes additional metabolite losses. CONCLUSIONS: The methanol-chloroform extraction seems to be an optimal method for tissues with the high lipid content, providing a satisfactory lipid removal and low metabolite losses. The ultrafiltration leads to large losses of metabolites (up to 60%) and for this reason is not suitable for quantitative analysis.
INTRODUCTION: Quantification of metabolites in biological fluids and tissues by NMR spectroscopy is challenged by the presence of abundant macromolecules and lipoproteins in samples, which give broad signals in the NMR spectra. To improve the quality of NMR spectra the different protocols for protein and lipid removal from the sample are used. OBJECTIVES: This work is aimed at the evaluation of the effectiveness of various methods of purification of blood serum from proteins and lipids for 1H NMR metabolomic profiling. METHODS: The advantages and limitations of different methods of the sample preparation for NMR-based quantitative metabolomics have been compared, including ultrafiltration, methanol and ethanol extractions with and without additional lipid removal, and methanol-chloroform extraction. RESULTS: The concentrations of 30 abundant metabolites extracted from human blood serum have been measured. It is found that ultrafiltration provides the best lipid removal, but causes significant and inhomogeneous metabolite losses. Ethanol and methanol extractions demonstrate similar performance with the minimal metabolite losses, and are ideal for fluids and tissues with low lipid content. The additional purification of alcohol extracts from lipids allows for the significant improving of NMR spectra, but causes additional metabolite losses. CONCLUSIONS: The methanol-chloroform extraction seems to be an optimal method for tissues with the high lipid content, providing a satisfactory lipid removal and low metabolite losses. The ultrafiltration leads to large losses of metabolites (up to 60%) and for this reason is not suitable for quantitative analysis.
Authors: Elizabeth J Want; Grace O'Maille; Colin A Smith; Theodore R Brandon; Wilasinee Uritboonthai; Chuan Qin; Sunia A Trauger; Gary Siuzdak Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Olaf Beckonert; Hector C Keun; Timothy M D Ebbels; Jacob Bundy; Elaine Holmes; John C Lindon; Jeremy K Nicholson Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2007 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Olga A Snytnikova; Anjella Zh Fursova; Elena I Chernyak; Vladimir G Vasiliev; Sergey V Morozov; Nataliya G Kolosova; Yuri P Tsentalovich Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2008-03-26 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Nikolaos Psychogios; David D Hau; Jun Peng; An Chi Guo; Rupasri Mandal; Souhaila Bouatra; Igor Sinelnikov; Ramanarayan Krishnamurthy; Roman Eisner; Bijaya Gautam; Nelson Young; Jianguo Xia; Craig Knox; Edison Dong; Paul Huang; Zsuzsanna Hollander; Theresa L Pedersen; Steven R Smith; Fiona Bamforth; Russ Greiner; Bruce McManus; John W Newman; Theodore Goodfriend; David S Wishart Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Erica L-W Majumder; Elizabeth M Billings; H Paul Benton; Richard L Martin; Amelia Palermo; Carlos Guijas; Markus M Rinschen; Xavier Domingo-Almenara; J Rafael Montenegro-Burke; Bradley A Tagtow; Robert S Plumb; Gary Siuzdak Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2021-01-22 Impact factor: 13.491
Authors: Banny S B Correia; Vinicius G Ferreira; Priscila M F D Piagge; Mariana B Almeida; Nilson A Assunção; Joyce R S Raimundo; Fernando L A Fonseca; Emanuel Carrilho; Daniel R Cardoso Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2022-06-08 Impact factor: 5.370
Authors: Sergei V Shekhovtsov; Nina A Bulakhova; Yuri P Tsentalovich; Ekaterina A Zelentsova; Lyudmila V Yanshole; Ekaterina N Meshcheryakova; Daniil I Berman Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Mariya A Borisova; Olga A Snytnikova; Ekaterina A Litvinova; Kseniya M Achasova; Tatiana I Babochkina; Alexey V Pindyurin; Yuri P Tsentalovich; Elena N Kozhevnikova Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-02-11 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Catherine L J Brown; Hannah Scott; Crystal Mulik; Amy S Freund; Michael P Opyr; Gerlinde A S Metz; G Douglas Inglis; Tony Montina Journal: Metabolites Date: 2022-02-05
Authors: Jamie M Newton; Emma L Betts; Lyto Yiangou; Jose Ortega Roldan; Anastasios D Tsaousis; Gary S Thompson Journal: Molecules Date: 2021-05-29 Impact factor: 4.927