4.5 Article

Proteomic Profiling of the Liver, Hepatic Lymph Nodes, and Spleen of Buffaloes Infected with Fasciola gigantica

期刊

PATHOGENS
卷 9, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pathogens9120982

关键词

Buffalo; Fasciola gigantica; fascioliasis; quantitative proteomics; liver; hepatic lymph node; spleen

资金

  1. National Key Basic Research Program (973 Program) of China [2015CB150300]
  2. Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program (ASTIP) [CAAS-ASTIP-2016-LVRI-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study, we used an isobaric tag for relative and absolute quantitation (iTRAQ) proteomics technology to characterize the differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) in the liver, hepatic lymph nodes (hLNs), and spleen of buffaloes infected with Fasciola gigantica (F. gigantica). We also used the parallel reaction monitoring (PRM) method to verify the expression levels of the DEPs in the three infected tissues. At three days post-infection (dpi), 225, 1821, and 364 DEPs were detected in the liver, hLNs, and spleen, respectively. At 42 dpi, 384, 252, and 214 DEPs were detected in the liver, hLNs, and spleen, respectively. At 70 dpi, 125, 829, and 247 DEPs were detected in the liver, hLNs, and spleen, respectively. Downregulation of metabolism was prominent in infected livers at all time points, and upregulation of immune responses was marked in the hLNs during early infection (three dpi); however, no changes in the immune response were detected at the late stages of infection (42 and 70 dpi). Compared to the hLNs, there was no significant upregulation in the levels of immune responses in the infected spleen. All the identified DEPs were used to predict the subcellular localization of the proteins, which were related to extracellular space and membrane and were involved in host immune responses. Further PRM analysis confirmed the expression of 18 proteins. These data provide the first simultaneous proteomic profiles of multiple organs of buffaloes experimentally infected with F. gigantica.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据