| Literature DB >> 34082718 |
Kay M Russell1, Jacqueline Smith1, Abi Bremner1, Cosmin Chintoan-Uta1, Lonneke Vervelde1, Androniki Psifidi2, Mark P Stevens3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Campylobacter jejuni is the leading cause of bacterial gastroenteritis in humans and the handling or consumption of contaminated poultry meat is a key source of infection. Selective breeding of poultry that exhibit elevated resistance to Campylobacter is an attractive control strategy. Here we studied the global transcriptional response of inbred chicken lines that differ in resistance to C. jejuni colonisation at a key site of bacterial persistence.Entities:
Keywords: Campylobacter jejuni; Chicken; Gene expression; Inbred; RNA-Seq; Resistance; Susceptibility; Transcriptome
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34082718 PMCID: PMC8176612 DOI: 10.1186/s12864-021-07748-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Fig. 1C. jejuni M1 colonisation in line 61 and line N birds. Birds were orally inoculated at 3 weeks of age with 108 CFU of C. jejuni M1 and the number of C. jejuni M1 per gram of caecal content determined at 1 and 5 dpi. Shown are the log10 CFU of C. jejuni per gram of caecal content from individual birds. N = 3 for each line at each time point. Crosshairs represent the mean count for each group. Significant differences were determined by Anova where * indicates significance at P < 0.01
DEGs between control and infected susceptible line N birds at 1 and 5 dpi
| Gene ID | Gene name | FC | FDR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DE at 1 dpi | ENSGALG00000005648 | SESN2 | 2.06 | 6.86E-07 | 3.49E-03 |
| ENSGALG00000041202 | FBXO32 | 1.98 | 4.56E-07 | 3.49E-03 | |
| ENSGALG00000016785 | IL1RL1 | 1.74 | 6.12E-06 | 1.27E-02 | |
| ENSGALG00000008885 | PDE1A | 1.52 | 8.40E-07 | 3.49E-03 | |
| ENSGALG00000004058 | GPR146 | 1.51 | 2.07E-06 | 6.88E-03 | |
| ENSGALG00000008050 | HBP1 | 1.41 | 5.72E-07 | 3.49E-03 | |
| ENSGALG00000008107 | IRS4 | 1.39 | 3.62E-06 | 8.60E-03 | |
| ENSGALG00000013489 | CCDC82 | 1.37 | 3.33E-06 | 8.60E-03 | |
| DE at 5 dpi | ENSGALG00000041079 | CCL7 | 9.58 | 3.19E-06 | 2.23E-02 |
| ENSGALG00000044062 | GIMAP8 | 3.9 | 1.30E-06 | 2.16E-02 | |
| ENSGALG00000031227 | ELP6 | 0.53 | 4.02E-06 | 2.23E-02 |
Fig. 2IPA of DEGs in the caecal tonsils of control and C. jejuni M1 colonised line 61 birds at 1 dpi. Shown are the significant canonical pathways (A), molecular functions (B) and physiological functions (C) associated with DEGs. N = 3 for both groups
Fig. 3IPA comparison analysis of DEGs identified between line 61 and N C. jejuni M1 colonised birds at 1 dpi. Shown are significant canonical pathways identified from a comparison of DEGs between 3 infected compared to 3 control birds of each line. The degree of difference in expression is denoted by the depth of colour, with a darker colour indicating a greater degree of expression
Fig. 4IPA of DEGs identified between control birds of line 61 and N. Shown are significant canonical pathways (A) and molecular functions (B) associated with DEGs between control birds. In (A), red bars indicate canonical pathways upregulated in line N and blue bars indicate pathways upregulated in line 61. N = 6 for each line (3 control birds pooled from each time point)
Fig. 5Graphia clustering of RNA-Seq data across all samples. Each node (circle) in the graph represents a gene, and each edge (line) a correlation exceeding a threshold (rho ≥ 0.93). MCL cluster granularity was set to 1.5. The most prominent clustering is by bird line with two main components being identified: component 1 - genes expressed at higher levels in line N (A) and component 2 - genes expressed at higher levels in line 61 (B). Colours indicate clusters of genes which have a similar expression pattern. (C) and (D) show the number of genes from each cluster in individual birds, identified by matching colours in corresponding components
Fig. 6qRT-PCR validation of DEGs identified by RNA-Seq. Shown is the correlation of the log2 fold change in mRNA transcripts as determined by RNA-Seq (y-axis) with the log2 fold change of mRNA transcripts as determined by qRT-PCR (x-axis). DEGs that were validated are given in Additional file 11: Table 6. The line of best fit is represented in blue with the R2 value denoted on the graph