| Literature DB >> 31619718 |
Marta Alonso-Hearn1, Maria Canive2, Cristina Blanco-Vazquez3, Rosana Torremocha4, Ana Balseiro3, Javier Amado5, Endika Varela-Martinez6, Ricardo Ramos4, Begoña M Jugo6, Rosa Casais3.
Abstract
Paratuberculosis is chronic granulomatous enteritis of ruminants caused by Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (MAP). Whole RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq) is a promising source of novel biomarkers for early MAP infection and disease progression in cattle. Since the blood transcriptome is widely used as a source of biomarkers, we analyzed whether it recapitulates, at least in part, the transcriptome of the ileocecal valve (ICV), the primary site of MAP colonization. Total RNA was prepared from peripheral blood (PB) and ICV samples, and RNA-Seq was used to compare gene expression between animals with focal or diffuse histopathological lesions in gut tissues versus control animals with no detectable signs of infection. Our results demonstrated both shared, and PB and ICV-specific gene expression in response to a natural MAP infection. As expected, the number of differentially expressed (DE) genes was larger in the ICV than in the PB samples. Among the DE genes in the PB and ICV samples, there were some common genes irrespective of the type of lesion including the C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 8 (CXCL8/IL8), apolipoprotein L (APOLD1), and the interferon inducible protein 27 (IFI27). The biological processes (BP) enriched in the PB gene expression profiles from the cows with diffuse lesions included the killing of cells of other organism, defense response, immune response and the regulation of neutrophil chemotaxis. Two of these BP, the defense and immune response, were also enriched in the ICV from the cows with diffuse lesions. Metabolic analysis of the DE genes revealed that the N-glycan biosynthesis, bile secretion, one-carbon pool by folate and purine metabolism were significantly enriched in the ICV from the cows with focal lesions. In the ICV from cows with diffuse lesions; the valine, leucine and isoleucine degradation route, purine metabolism, vitamin digestion and absorption and the cholesterol routes were enriched. Some of the identified DE genes, BP and metabolic pathways will be studied further to develop novel diagnostic tools, vaccines and immunotherapeutics.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31619718 PMCID: PMC6795908 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-51328-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Histopathological analysis, ZN stain, ELISA, PCR and bacteriological culture results from all the animals included in the current study.
| ID | Histopathological analysis | ELISA (OD) | Fecal PCR | Fecal culture (CFUs) | Gut tissues | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microscopic | Macroscopic | ZN | Pre-mortem | At slaughter | Pre-mortem | At slaughter | Pre-mortem | At slaughter | PCR | Culture | |
| 1 | Negative | No | Neg | Neg (1.26) | Neg (1.93) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg |
| 2 | Negative | No | Neg | Neg (2.77) | Neg (8.54) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg |
| 3 | Negative | No | Neg | Neg (8.99) | Neg (2.45) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg |
| 4 | Focal | No | Neg | ND | Neg (2.71) | ND | Neg | ND | Neg | Pos (0.38) | Neg |
| 5 | Focal | No | Neg | Neg (1.00) | Neg (1.03) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Pos (7.50) | Low |
| 6 | Focal | No | Neg | Neg (4.39) | Neg (5.51) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Pos (305.28) | Neg |
| 7 | Focal | No | Neg | Neg (4.92) | Neg (0.74) | Pos (0.03) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Pos (12.26) | Neg |
| 8 | Focal | No | Neg | Pos (95.85) | Pos (133.17) | Neg | Pos | Neg | Neg | Pos (70.54) | Medium |
| 9 | Multifocal | Yes | Pos | Neg (0.00) | Neg (2.97) | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg | Neg |
| 10 | Diffuse paucibacillary | Yes | Pos | Neg (53.00) | Pos (283.13) | Neg | Pos | Neg | Neg | Pos (667.65) | Heavy |
| 11 | Diffuse intermediate | Yes | Pos | Pos (142.31) | Pos (187.69) | Pos (0.14) | Pos (0.14) | Neg | Neg | Pos (3896.19) | Heavy |
| 12 | Diffuse intermediate | Yes | Pos | Pos (174.01) | Pos (241.18) | Pos (7.50) | Pos (114.00) | Neg | Heavy | Pos (104032) | Heavy |
| 13 | Diffuse intermediate | Yes | Pos | Neg (32.19) | Pos (288.75) | Pos (1.41) | Pos (39.88) | Neg | Neg | Pos (1572.24) | Low |
| 14 | Diffuse multibacillary | Yes | Pos | Pos (286.51) | Pos (255.55) | Pos (11.70) | Pos (2832.00) | Neg | Neg | Pos (173316.00) | Heavy |
Neg, Negative; Pos, Positive; ZN, Ziehl-Neelsen; OD, Optical Density; CFU, Colony Forming Units; ND, No Determined. DNA samples with a PCR-positive result using the LSI VetMax Triplex real-time PCR were quantified using the ParaTB Kuanti-VK kit. qPCR results are expressed as MAP DNA copies per gram of feces or tissues × 102.
Figure 1RNA-seq analysis. (a) Volcano plots showing the DE genes (log2 fold change) versus –log (p value) for each comparison. The red spots represent the DE genes in each comparison. (b) Venn diagram showing transcriptional changes between the groups comparisons based on RNA-Seq data.
Differentially expressed (DE) genes and specific DE genes for each comparison.
| Sample | Comparison | DE genes (N) | Up-regulated genes (N) | Down-regulated genes (N) | Comparison specific DE genes (N) | Up-regulated genes (N) | Down-regulated genes (N) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PB | Focal vs Control | 109 | 21 | 88 | 37 | 11 | 26 |
| PB | Diffuse vs. Control | 207 | 48 | 159 | 82 | 21 | 61 |
| PB | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | 51 | 6 | 45 | 30 | 4 | 26 |
| ICV | Focal vs. Control | 3189 | 168 | 3021 | 620 | 68 | 552 |
| ICV | Diffuse vs. Control | 4724 | 1473 | 3251 | 2105 | 1321 | 784 |
| ICV | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | 2557 | 96 | 2446 | 2505 | 93 | 2397 |
| PB, ICV | Focal vs. Control | 19 | 0 | 18 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| PB, ICV | Diffuse vs. Control | 89 | 20 | 49 | 33 | 17 | 12 |
| PB, ICV | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | 5 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 4 |
The top five up- and downregulated DE genes in samples from MAP-infected cows versus control samples.
| Sample | Comparison | Gene ID | Description | Fold Change (Log2)a |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PB | Focal vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000003531 |
| 3.7 |
| ENSBTAG00000039691 | Uncharacterized protein | 2.7 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000039086 | Uncharacterized protein | 2.6 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000000930 | Uncharacterized protein | 2.2 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000019348 |
| 2.0 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000022514 |
| −3.6 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000001032 |
| −3.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000011824 |
| −3.9 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000019406 |
| −4.0 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000010738 |
| −4.5 | ||
| Diffuse vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000046419 |
| 3.8 | |
| ENSBTAG00000013921 |
| 3.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000005353 |
| 3.7 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000046611 | Uncharacterized protein | 3.6 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000018369 |
| 3.6 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000047764 |
| −5.1 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000010738 |
| −5.3 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000002976 |
| −5.4 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000031599 |
| −7.4 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000020072 |
| −7.7 | ||
| ICV | Focal vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000022937 |
| 10.6 |
| ENSBTAG00000013027 |
| 6.3 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000014663 |
| 5.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000010632 |
| 4.2 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000039035 |
| 4.2 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000020184 |
| −3.2 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000019379 |
| −3.2 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000046611 | Uncharacterized protein | −3.6 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000013055 |
| −3.6 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000047008 | Uncharacterized protein | −6.7 | ||
| Diffuse vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000022937 |
| 6.8 | |
| ENSBTAG00000039035 |
| 5.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000048075 |
| 5.1 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000008505 |
| 4.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000016662 |
| 4.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000020184 |
| −4.5 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000001417 |
| −4.7 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000026323 |
| −5.3 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000019813 |
| −5.8 | ||
| ENSBTAG00000011941 |
| −8.3 |
aA negative fold-change value reports downregulated gene expression.
The top 3 up- and downregulated genes in the PB and/or ICV samples of infected animals with focal and/or diffuse lesions versus control samples.
| Sample | Comparison | Gen ID | Description (Gene Symbol) | Lesion | Fold Change (Log2)a |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PB | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000019348 | Uncharacterized protein | Focal | 2.0 |
| Diffuse | 1.6 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000004547 |
| Focal | 1.1 | ||
| Diffuse | 2.3 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000011007 |
| Focal | 1.3 | ||
| Diffuse | 1.7 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000001032 |
| Focal | −3.8 | ||
| Diffuse | −2.7 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000019406 |
| Focal | −4.0 | ||
| Diffuse | −2.8 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000010738 |
| Focal | −4.5 | ||
| Diffuse | −5.3 | ||||
| ICV | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000022937 |
| Focal | 10.6 |
| Diffuse | 6.8 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000010632 |
| Focal | 4.2 | ||
| Diffuse | 4.7 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000039035 |
| Focal | 4.2 | ||
| Diffuse | 5.8 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000047181 |
| Focal | −3.2 | ||
| Diffuse | −2.3 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000020184 |
| Focal | −3.2 | ||
| Diffuse | −4.5 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000013055 |
| Focal | −3.6 | ||
| Diffuse | −2.0 | ||||
| PB + ICV | Focal vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000036154 |
| Blood | −2.8 |
| ICV | −1.1 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000002362 |
| Blood | −2.6 | ||
| ICV | −1.1 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000038080 |
| Blood | −2.2 | ||
| ICV | −1.9 | ||||
| Diffuse vs. Control | ENSBTAG00000011467 |
| Blood | 2.6 | |
| ICV | 2.8 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000001725 |
| Blood | 2.0 | ||
| ICV | 2.2 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000046803 |
| Blood | 2.4 | ||
| ICV | 1.1 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000039196 |
| Blood | −4.8 | ||
| ICV | −2.0 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000010273 |
| Blood | −4.8 | ||
| ICV | −2.0 | ||||
| ENSBTAG00000019716 |
| Blood | −3.9 | ||
| ICV | −1.9 |
aA negative fold-change value reports downregulated gene expression.
Figure 2Localization of the Intelectin 2 (ITLN2) precursor in the ICV of MAP-infected versus control cows by immunohistochemistry. Sections of the ICV from animal without lesions (a,d), and with focal (b,e,g) or diffuse lesions (c,f,h) were labeled with an anti-bovine ITLN2 antibody and stained as explained in materials and methods. The arrows show sites of antibody binding. Bars are 50 µM.
Number of enriched gene ontologies (GOs) and specific GOs for each comparison.
| Sample | Comparison | Total enriched GO (N) | Enriched Biological process (N) | Enriched Cellular component (N) | Enriched Molecular function (N) | Specific enriched GO (N) | Enriched Biological process (N) | Enriched Cellular component (N) | Enriched Molecular function (N) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PB | Focal vs. Control | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PB | Diffuse vs. Control | 11 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| PB | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| ICV | Focal vs. Control | 83 | 32 | 31 | 19 | 34 | 13 | 12 | 9 |
| ICV | Diffuse vs. Control | 80 | 38 | 27 | 15 | 30 | 17 | 9 | 4 |
| ICV | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | 48 | 19 | 18 | 11 | 47 | 19 | 17 | 11 |
| PB, ICV | Focal vs. Control | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PB, ICV | Diffuse vs. Control | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| PB, ICV | Focal vs. Control + Diffuse vs. Control | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Figure 3Gene ontology (GO) analysis using the DE genes in the two groups of infected cows compared to the control group. (a) The eleven GO enriched in the PB samples collected from the group of animals with diffuse lesions in gut tissues versus the control group. (b) The 11 top biological processes overrepresented in the ICV samples collected from the animals with focal lesions versus the control group. (c) The 11 top biological processes enriched in the ICV samples from the group of cows with diffuse lesions versus the control group.
Figure 4Enriched biological process in PB and ICV from the cows with diffuse lesions versus the control group. The defense response (GO:0006952) and immune response (GO:0006955) biological processes were both enriched in the PB and ICV gene expression profiles from the cows with diffuse lesions. The heatmaps represent the fold change (log2 fold) of the up- and downregulated genes included in the enriched GO:0006952 and GO:0006955. Colors and intensities depend on expression levels. Red indicated gene downregulation and blue upregulation.
Figure 5Protein-protein network analysis using the DE genes (log2 fold > 2 and < 2) in the transcriptomic profiles of the cows with PTB-associated lesions versus the control group. (a) Using the DE genes in the PB samples from the animals with focal lesions, two HBEGF-IL8 and TAC3-F2RL3 functional interactions were detected. (b) In the PB samples from the cows with diffuse lesions, two IL8 and COL1A2 centered networks were observed. (c) When the DE genes in the ICV transcriptomic profiles of the cows with focal lesions were used, a IL8 centered network was also obtained. (d) A MAPK8 centered network was retrieved when the DE genes in the ICV transcriptomic profile of the cows with diffuse lesions were searched in the STRING database. Individual nodes represent proteins with relationships represented by edges. The confidence score (>0.7) of each interaction is mapped to the edge thickness. The proteins with no associations to other proteins in the networks were hidden.