| Literature DB >> 35360242 |
Rosamaria Militello1, Gabriella Pinto2,3, Anna Illiano2,3, Simone Luti1, Francesca Magherini1, Angela Amoresano2, Pietro Amedeo Modesti4, Alessandra Modesti1.
Abstract
Monitoring fatigue and recovery during training periods contributes to identifying the best training methods to achieve sports performance. To date, little is known about sex-related differences in sports adaptations. The aim of the present study is to identify sex-related sports adaptation proteins in female basketball players and male basketball players using proteomics approach on plasma samples withdrawn from athletes during in-season training period but far from a competition. A cohort of 20 professional basketball players, 10 female (BF) and 10 male (BM), and 20 sedentary male (10 CM) and female (10 CF) as control, of comparable age and BMI, were involved in this study. Protein profiles of plasma samples obtained from BM, BF, CM, and CF were analyzed by two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE). Differentially expressed proteins were identified by mass spectrometry. The computational 2-DE gel image analysis pointed out 33 differentially expressed protein spots (ANOVA p-value < 0.05) and differences between male and female basketball players are more evident among the players than controls. The expression profile of 54.5% of the total proteins is affected by sports activity. Furthermore, 14 proteins are differentially expressed in basket female players in comparison with their relative controls while seven are differentially expressed in basket male players in comparison with their controls. In conclusion, we identify in female athletes a reduction in proteins related to transcription regulation, most of these modulate chronic inflammation confirming the anti-inflammatory effect of regular training in female muscle metabolism. In male and female athletes, we found a decrease in Transthyretin involved in muscle homeostasis and regeneration and Dermcidin a stress-induced myokine linked to inflammatory and it will be interesting to fully understand the role of its different isoforms in male and female skeletal muscle contraction.Entities:
Keywords: basketball; exerkines; plasma proteome; regular training; sex differences
Year: 2022 PMID: 35360242 PMCID: PMC8964093 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2022.813447
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Participants’ characteristics.
| Characteristics | Mean (SD) | Unpaired | ||||||
| Basket male | Control male | Basket female | Control female | BM | BF | BM | CM | |
| Age (year) | 21 ± 2.2 | 26.1 ± 4.1 | 25.1 ± 5.5 | 26.9 ± 2.2 | 0.001 | 0.42 | 0.03 | 0.64 |
| Weight (kg) | 81.5 ± 10.2 | 73 ± 8.7 | 68.7 ± 11.9 | 58.7 ± 5.8 | 0.05 | 0.051 | 0.02 | 0.001 |
| Height (cm) | 186 ± 0.06 | 178.7 ± 0.06 | 175.6 ± 0.08 | 163.4 ± 0.06 | 0.008 | 0.004 | 0.004 | < 0.0001 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.6 ± 2.7 | 22.9 ± 2.9 | 22.1 ± 2.05 | 22 ± 2.3 | 0.59 | 0.94 | 0.2 | 0.45 |
FIGURE 1Proteomic profile of Basketball players and controls (A) Representative 2-DE images of silver-stained gels of plasma proteins run on NL pH 3–10 IP strip and in 9–16% polyacrylamide linear gradient. Circles and numbers indicate statistically differentially abundant proteins between the four groups analyzed as reported in Table 2. (B) Multivariate analysis of the 2-DE gel images results using principal components analysis (PCA) performed by Progenesis SameSpots software version 4. (C) Distribution of differentially abundant protein spots between pairwise comparisons of basketball male, control male, basketball female, and control female groups as detected by 2-DE analysis.
Quantitative data and statistical analyses of protein spots whose intensity levels significantly differed among the plasma of the four groups.
| Spots | Normalized volume (arbitrary unit) | ANOVA | Tukey’s test | ||||||
| Basket male | Control male | Basket female | Control female | BM | BF | BM | CM vs. CF | ||
| 1 | 2.2 ± 1 | 3.9 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 5.2 ± 0.5 | 0.032 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 2 | 22.4 ± 1.3 | 26.7 ± 1.9 | 20.5 ± 3.3 | 26.3 ± 1.2 | 0.026 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 3 | 2 ± 0.8 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 1 ± 0.4 | 0.6 ± 0.03 | 0.009 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 4 | 20.6 ± 5.8 | 17.6 ± 4.9 | 22.2 ± 4.7 | 10 ± 3.2 | 0.025 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 5 | 31.2 ± 9 | 19.1 ± 5 | 34.7 ± 11.9 | 12.7 ± 3 | 0.010 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 6 | 17.6 ± 4.3 | 9.1 ± 0.4 | 15.8 ± 3.4 | 8.2 ± 2 | 0.005 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 7 | 24.4 ± 3.1 | 11.3 ± 0.6 | 27.6 ± 7 | 12.2 ± 5.5 | 0.013 | ns | ns | ||
| 8 | 25 ± 1.8 | 11 ± 1.8 | 32.3 ± 10 | 11.9 ± 5.3 | 0.007 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 9 | 21.4 ± 4 | 9.5 ± 2.5 | 27.4 ± 9.1 | 9.6 ± 5 | 0.019 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 10 | 0.9 ± 0.4 | 0.5 ± 0.05 | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 2 ± 0.5 | 0.006 | ns | ns | ||
| 11 | 76.4 ± 10 | 88.3 ± 7 | 61.9 ± 7 | 89.8 ± 17.2 | 0.035 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 12 | 83.6 ± 6.5 | 118.3 ± 10.7 | 72.4 ± 7.8 | 110.3 ± 8 | 0.0004 | ns | ns | ||
| 13 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.3 | 1 ± 0.3 | 2 ± 0.5 | 0.001 | ||||
| 14 | 6.3 ± 0.5 | 1.9 ± 0.9 | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 4.2 ± 1.5 | 0.001 | ns | |||
| 15 | 0.4 ± 0.1 | 0.4 ± 0.04 | 0.2 ± 0.05 | 0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.047 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 16 | 3.9 ± 1 | 2.4 ± 0.4 | 2 ± 0.3 | 2 ± 0.5 | 0.024 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 17 | 1 ± 0.4 | 0.6 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.09 | 0.3 ± 0.2 | 0.017 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 18 | 10.2 ± 4 | 5.5 ± 0.7 | 4.8 ± 0.3 | 3.9 ± 1.2 | 0.020 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 19 | 1.4 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 0.4 | 2.8 ± 1.1 | 0.8 ± 0.5 | 0.027 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 20 | 0.1 ± 0.05 | 0.04 ± 0.007 | 0.05 ± 0.03 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 0.017 | ns | ns | ||
FIGURE 2Cluster analysis of protein differentially expressed between the four groups (ANOVA p-value < 0.05) performed by Progenesis SameSpots software version 4.
Differentially expressed protein spots from 2D-GE identified by LC-MS/MS Analysis.
| Spots no | Protein name | Gi number | AC | Gene name | Score | Protein sequence coverage % | Tukey’s test | |||
| BM | BF | BM | CM | |||||||
| 1 | Serotransferrin | gi|553788 | P02787 | TF | 123 | 18 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 1 | Dermcidin | gi|16751921 | P81605 | DCD | 64 | 25.5 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 2 | Serotransferrin | gi|110590597 | P02787 | TF | 1960 | 74.4 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 3 | The human T-cell receptor | gi|553734 | A0N4V7 | Tcr−alpha | 35 | 38.1 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 4 | Fibrinogen beta chain | gi|237823915 | P02675 | FGB | 904 | 82 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 5 | Centrosome-associated protein CEP250 | gi|2832237 | Q9BV73 | CEP250 | 54 | 2.1 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 7 | p532 | gi|1477565 | Q15751 | HERC1 | 62 | 1.3 | ns | ns | ||
| 11 | Haptoglobin | gi|306882 | P00738 | HP | 98 | 21.7 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 11bis | Complement component C3 | gi|179665 | P01024 | C3 | 151 | 3.4 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 11ter | Zinc-alpha-2-glycoprotein | gi|38026 | P25311 | AZGP1 | 231 | 34.1 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 12 | Transthyretin Chain A | gi|126030594 | P02766 | TTR | 551 | 89.8 | ns | ns | ||
| 13 | Spectrin alpha chain, non-erythrocytic 1 | gi|179106 | Q13813 | SPTAN1 | 50 | 2.8 | ||||
| 14 | Peroxisomal acyl-coenzyme A oxidase 1 | gi|458119 | Q15067 | ACOX1 | 38 | 5 | ns | |||
| 15 | RNA-binding protein 15 | gi|14041646 | Q96T37 | RBM15 | 50 | 3.7 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 16 | T cell receptor | gi|553734 | A0N4V7 | Tcr-alpha | 34 | 38.1 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 17 | Histone H3.1 | gi|315113506 | P68431 | H3C1 | 39 | 59.1 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 18 | SH2 domain-containing adapter protein B | gi|406738 | Q15464 | SHB | 38 | 3 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 19 | Programmed cell death protein 4 | gi|224036249 | Q53EL6 | PDCD4 | 36 | 9.1 | ns | ns | ns | |
| 20 | Tumor susceptibility gene 101 protein | gi|48425520 | Q99816 | TSG101 | 41 | 15.9 | ns | ns | ||
FIGURE 3Protein-protein interaction network of the totality of proteins identified by 2D spots (A). Two tables included as inserts the fold change values for up or downregulated proteins. Panel (B) is a zoomed visualization of the downregulated protein network. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, and ****p < 0.0001.
List of up/down regulated significant pathways derived from Reactome analysis (p-value < 0.05).
| Pathway name | Entities found | Entities Total | Entities ratio | Entities | Entities FDR |
|
| |||||
| TYSND1 cleaves peroxisomal proteins | 1 | 7 | 0.001 | 8.42E-3 | 9.35E-2 |
| Platelet degranulation | 2 | 128 | 0.011 | 1.02E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Response to elevated platelet cytosolic Ca2 + | 2 | 133 | 0.011 | 1.09E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Beta-oxidation of very long chain fatty acids | 1 | 11 | 0.001 | 1.32E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| HDL remodeling | 1 | 11 | 0.001 | 1.32E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Transport of organic anions | 1 | 12 | 0.001 | 1.44E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Caspase-mediated cleavage of cytoskeletal proteins | 1 | 12 | 0.001 | 1.44E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) metabolism | 1 | 13 | 0.001 | 1.56E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| alpha-linolenic (omega3) and linoleic (omega6) acid metabolism | 1 | 13 | 0.001 | 1.56E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| p130Cas linkage to MAPK signaling for integrins | 1 | 15 | 0.001 | 1.8E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| GRB2:SOS provides linkage to MAPK signaling for Integrins | 1 | 15 | 0.001 | 1.8E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Membrane binding and targeting of GAG proteins | 1 | 15 | 0.001 | 1.8E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Synthesis And Processing Of GAG, GAGPOL Polyproteins | 1 | 15 | 0.001 | 1.8E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Heme biosynthesis | 1 | 15 | 0.001 | 1.8E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| HCMV Late Events | 2 | 173 | 0.015 | 1.8E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Recycling of bile acids and salts | 1 | 16 | 0.001 | 1.92E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Heme degradation | 1 | 16 | 0.001 | 1.92E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| MyD88 deficiency (TLR2/4) | 1 | 19 | 0.002 | 2.27E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| IRAK4 deficiency (TLR2/4) | 1 | 20 | 0.002 | 2.39E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
| Regulation of TLR by endogenous ligand | 1 | 21 | 0.002 | 2.51E-2 | 9.35E-2 |
|
| |||||
| Post-translational protein phosphorylation | 2 | 107 | 0.009 | 3.65E-3 | 6.7E-2 |
| Alternative complement activation | 1 | 5 | 0 | 4.31E-3 | 6.7E-2 |
| Regulation of Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF) transport and uptake by Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Proteins (IGFBPs) | 2 | 124 | 0.011 | 4.87E-3 | 6.7E-2 |
| Activation of C3 and C5 | 1 | 7 | 0.001 | 6.02E-3 | 6.7E-2 |
| Neutrophil degranulation | 3 | 480 | 0.041 | 6.85E-3 | 6.7E-2 |
| Type I hemidesmosome assembly | 1 | 11 | 0.001 | 9.45E-3 | 6.7E-2 |
| Caspase-mediated cleavage of cytoskeletal proteins | 1 | 12 | 0.001 | 1.03E-2 | 6.7E-2 |
| Retinoid cycle disease events | 1 | 13 | 0.001 | 1.12E-2 | 6.7E-2 |
| Diseases associated with visual transduction | 1 | 13 | 0.001 | 1.12E-2 | 6.7E-2 |
| Diseases of the neuronal system | 1 | 13 | 0.001 | 1.12E-2 | 6.7E-2 |
| Innate Immune System | 4 | 1,19 | 0.103 | 1.4E-2 | 7.02E-2 |
| The canonical retinoid cycle in rods (twilight vision) | 1 | 23 | 0.002 | 1.97E-2 | 7.93E-2 |
| Miscellaneous transport and binding events | 1 | 26 | 0.002 | 2.22E-2 | 7.93E-2 |
| Purinergic signaling in leishmaniasis infection | 1 | 27 | 0.002 | 2.31E-2 | 7.93E-2 |
| Cell recruitment (pro-inflammatory response) | 1 | 27 | 0.002 | 2.31E-2 | 7.93E-2 |
| Extracellular matrix organization | 2 | 301 | 0.026 | 2.64E-2 | 7.93E-2 |
| Transferrin endocytosis and recycling | 1 | 31 | 0.003 | 2.64E-2 | 7.93E-2 |
| Apoptotic cleavage of cellular proteins | 1 | 38 | 0.003 | 3.23E-2 | 8.8E-2 |
| Retinoid metabolism and transport | 1 | 44 | 0.004 | 3.73E-2 | 8.8E-2 |
| Metabolism of fat-soluble vitamins | 1 | 48 | 0.004 | 4.07E-2 | 8.8E-2 |
FIGURE 4Identified proteins and Gene Ontology (GO) analysis (Biological process categories). (A) DAG of all the proteins identified. (B) Bar Chart with enrichment ratio and FDR. (C) Enriched Gene set showing the distribution of the identified proteins. (D) Bar chart showing the Biological Process to which the identified proteins belong.
FIGURE 5Identified proteins and GO analysis (Cellular Component categories). (A) DAG of all the proteins identified. (B) Bar Chart with enrichment ratio and FDR. (C) Enriched Gene set showing the distribution of the identified proteins. (D) Bar chart showing the Cellular Component to which the identified proteins belong.
FIGURE 6Validation of proteomic results. Histograms and representative immunoblot images of Dermcidin and Transthyretin in BM (basketball male group), CM (control male group), BF (basketball female group), and CF (control female group). Normalization of immunoblot was performed on Coomassie-stained PVDF membrane. The statistical analysis was carried out by the two-tailed t-test using Graphpad Prism 8 (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01).