| Literature DB >> 35859757 |
Janina Feige-Diller1,2, Marisol Herrera-Rivero3, Anika Witten3,4, Monika Stoll2,3, Sylvia Kaiser1, S Helene Richter1,2, Norbert Sachser1,2.
Abstract
Background: During early phases of life, such as prenatal or early postnatal development and adolescence, an organism's phenotype can be shaped by the environmental conditions it experiences. According to the Match-Mismatch hypothesis (MMH), changes to this environment during later life stages can result in a mismatch between the individual's adaptations and the prevailing environmental conditions. Thus, negative consequences in welfare and health can occur. We aimed to test the MMH in the context of food availability, assuming adolescence as a sensitive period of adaptation.Entities:
Keywords: Match-Mismatch hypothesis; RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq); differential expression (DE) analysis; food availability changes; immunity and inflammation; liver transcriptome; metabolism
Year: 2022 PMID: 35859757 PMCID: PMC9289739 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.910762
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Figure 1(A) Experimental design. Mice were kept at high (H) or low (L) food availability conditions during 6 weeks of adolescence. Upon reaching early adulthood, food availability either remained the same (match) or was changed (mismatch) for another 11 weeks. During the last 5 weeks, behavioral tests were conducted for a previous publication (24). Subsequently, final body weights and body length were assessed; liver samples were weighed and collected for RNA-sequencing. (B) Progressive increases in body weight were assessed at weeks 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 12 and at the end of the experiment. Afterwards, liver weight was recorded. Significant differences (Tukey HSD adj. p < 0.05) between groups are denoted by (*). L, low food availability; H, high food availability.
Basic description of the sample used for transcriptomic profiling by RNA-sequencing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Samples | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | ||||||
| Week 1 (g) | 12.38 | 1.75 | 10.88 | 1.61 | 12.78 | 0.86 | 12.83 | 1.90 | 0.3080 | |
| Week 2 (g) | 15.28 | 0.67 | 14.08 | 1.26 | 13.60 | 0.22 | 13.95 | 1.15 | 0.1090 | |
| Week 6 (g) | 19.23 | 0.79 | 19.45 | 1.13 | 17.33 | 1.13 | 17.23 | 1.16 | 0.0173 | |
| Week 7 (g) | 20.13 | 1.33 | 20.03 | 1.21 | 18.08 | 1.69 | 17.98 | 1.18 | 0.0725 | |
| Week 8 (g) | 20.55 | 0.83 | 18.75 | 1.29 | 20.58 | 0.76 | 17.83 | 1.70 | 0.0165 | LL vs. HH |
| Week 12 (g) | 22.23 | 0.71 | 19.46 | 1.93 | 22.10 | 1.57 | 18.35 | 1.59 | 0.0077 | LL vs. HH |
| Final body weight (g) | 23.31 | 1.61 | 19.40 | 1.74 | 23.07 | 1.40 | 19.09 | 1.11 | 0.0017 | HL vs. HH |
| Liver weight (g) | 0.92 | 0.09 | 0.80 | 0.03 | 0.98 | 0.08 | 0.85 | 0.04 | 0.0112 | LH vs. HL |
| Rel. weight-liver (%) | 3.96 | 0.34 | 4.16 | 0.51 | 4.23 | 0.20 | 4.44 | 0.37 | 0.3710 | |
| Final body length (cm) | 9.43 | 0.26 | 9.00 | 0.42 | 9.40 | 0.36 | 9.08 | 0.67 | 0.4560 | |
L, low food availability; H, high food availability; SD, standard deviation.
P-val, p-value from ANOVA test, pairwise significant: adjusted p-value from Tukey post-hoc test.
Figure 2(A) Plot of the first 2 principal components (PCs) of the normalized read counts. (B) Overlaps of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and (C) the corresponding enriched Gene Ontology biological processes (GO_BPs) among all comparisons. No DEGs and/or GO_BP terms overlapping among all comparisons performed were identified. L, low food availability; H, high food availability.
Figure 3Overview of differential expression results for all comparisons. MA plots show the statistically significant (adjusted p < 0.05) dysregulations obtained in each comparison marked in red.
Summary of results from the differential expression and functional enrichment analyses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LL vs. HH | M vs. M | 452 | 221 | 231 | 291 | 37 (12.7) |
| HH vs. HL | M vs. MM | 518 | 227 | 291 | 459 | 85 (18.5) |
| HH vs. LH | M vs. MM | 3 | 1 | 2 | 40 | 19 (47.5) |
| LL vs. LH | M vs. MM | 808 | 397 | 411 | 426 | 86 (20.2) |
| LL vs. HL | M vs. MM | 19 | 8 | 11 | 104 | 43 (41.3) |
| HL vs. LH | MM vs. MM | 691 | 391 | 300 | 467 | 86 (18.4) |
L, low food availability; H, high food availability; M, match; MM, mismatch; DEGs, differentially expressed genes; Up, upregulated; downregulated; GO_BPs, Gene ontology biological processes.
Summary of biological processes enriched for each statistical comparison in a specific fashion.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| HH vs. HL | Antigen processing and presentation; calcium ion homeostasis; cell communication; response to metals, insulin, peptide hormones; enteric nervous system development; mating; myelination; regulation of cytoskeleton organization, innate immune response, ubiquitination, sodium transport, tissue remodeling, cell migration; proteolysis; white fat cell differentiation. |
| HH vs. LH | Appendage development, cell fate determination, zinc ion homeostasis, response to copper ion, meiosis. |
| HL vs. LH | Apoptosis, cytolysis; bone remodeling; Wnt signaling; carnitine, ceramide, mannose metabolism; cation transport; cell activation involved in immune response, T cell differentiation; erythrocyte development; fatty acid beta oxidation; regulation of inflammatory response, hormone secretion, striated muscle contraction, signaling, cholesterol storage. |
| LL vs. HH | Androgen metabolism, embryonic development, heart contraction, macromolecular complex assembly, lipoprotein particle remodeling. |
| LL vs. HL | Cellular responses to fatty acids, heparin, lipids; biosynthesis of cytokines, triglycerides; secretion of insulin and peptides; regulation of heart rate, histone modifications. |
| LL vs. LH | Carbohydrate homeostasis; response to carbohydrate stimulus, nutrient levels; chitin and energy reserve metabolism; cellular localization; glycosylation; mitochondrion organization; regulation of cell adhesion, transcription, arterial blood pressure; renal system; respiratory tube and salivary gland development. |
Figure 4(A) Top genes. Selection was based on the gene being differentially expressed within the top 20 most significant hits in more than one comparison, and belonging to a recognizable cluster of functional categories. TBA: transport of bile acids. (B) Representative top shared Gene Ontology biological processes (GO_BPs). Selected terms are representative of all different GO_BP terms enriched in at least four of the comparisons. Only significant (adjusted p < 0.05) genes and functional terms are shown.