Cargando…

The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)

Pin bones represent a major problem for processing and quality of fish products. Development of methods of removal requires better knowledge of the pin bones’ attachment to the muscle and structures involved in the breakdown during loosening. In this study, pin bones from cod and salmon were dissect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rønning, Sissel B., Østbye, Tone-Kari, Krasnov, Aleksei, Vuong, Tram T., Veiseth-Kent, Eva, Kolset, Svein O., Pedersen, Mona E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5374190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27807712
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10695-016-0309-0
_version_ 1782518848262504448
author Rønning, Sissel B.
Østbye, Tone-Kari
Krasnov, Aleksei
Vuong, Tram T.
Veiseth-Kent, Eva
Kolset, Svein O.
Pedersen, Mona E.
author_facet Rønning, Sissel B.
Østbye, Tone-Kari
Krasnov, Aleksei
Vuong, Tram T.
Veiseth-Kent, Eva
Kolset, Svein O.
Pedersen, Mona E.
author_sort Rønning, Sissel B.
collection PubMed
description Pin bones represent a major problem for processing and quality of fish products. Development of methods of removal requires better knowledge of the pin bones’ attachment to the muscle and structures involved in the breakdown during loosening. In this study, pin bones from cod and salmon were dissected from fish fillets after slaughter or storage on ice for 5 days, and thereafter analysed with molecular methods, which revealed major differences between these species before and after storage. The connective tissue (CT) attaches the pin bone to the muscle in cod, while the pin bones in salmon are embedded in adipose tissue. Collagens, elastin, lectin-binding proteins and glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) are all components of the attachment site, and this differ between salmon and cod, resulting in a CT in cod that is more resistant to enzymatic degradation compared to the CT in salmon. Structural differences are reflected in the composition of transcriptome. Microarray analysis comparing the attachment sites of the pin bones with a reference muscle sample showed limited differences in salmon. In cod, on the other hand, the variances were substantial, and the gene expression profiles suggested difference in myofibre structure, metabolism and cell processes between the pin bone attachment site and the reference muscle. Degradation of the connective tissue occurs closest to the pin bones and not in the neighbouring tissue, which was shown using light microscopy. This study shows that the attachment of the pin bones in cod and salmon is different; therefore, the development of methods for removal should be tailored to each individual species. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10695-016-0309-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5374190
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53741902017-04-12 The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.) Rønning, Sissel B. Østbye, Tone-Kari Krasnov, Aleksei Vuong, Tram T. Veiseth-Kent, Eva Kolset, Svein O. Pedersen, Mona E. Fish Physiol Biochem Article Pin bones represent a major problem for processing and quality of fish products. Development of methods of removal requires better knowledge of the pin bones’ attachment to the muscle and structures involved in the breakdown during loosening. In this study, pin bones from cod and salmon were dissected from fish fillets after slaughter or storage on ice for 5 days, and thereafter analysed with molecular methods, which revealed major differences between these species before and after storage. The connective tissue (CT) attaches the pin bone to the muscle in cod, while the pin bones in salmon are embedded in adipose tissue. Collagens, elastin, lectin-binding proteins and glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) are all components of the attachment site, and this differ between salmon and cod, resulting in a CT in cod that is more resistant to enzymatic degradation compared to the CT in salmon. Structural differences are reflected in the composition of transcriptome. Microarray analysis comparing the attachment sites of the pin bones with a reference muscle sample showed limited differences in salmon. In cod, on the other hand, the variances were substantial, and the gene expression profiles suggested difference in myofibre structure, metabolism and cell processes between the pin bone attachment site and the reference muscle. Degradation of the connective tissue occurs closest to the pin bones and not in the neighbouring tissue, which was shown using light microscopy. This study shows that the attachment of the pin bones in cod and salmon is different; therefore, the development of methods for removal should be tailored to each individual species. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10695-016-0309-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Netherlands 2016-11-02 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5374190/ /pubmed/27807712 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10695-016-0309-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Rønning, Sissel B.
Østbye, Tone-Kari
Krasnov, Aleksei
Vuong, Tram T.
Veiseth-Kent, Eva
Kolset, Svein O.
Pedersen, Mona E.
The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)
title The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)
title_full The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)
title_fullStr The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)
title_full_unstemmed The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)
title_short The role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and cod (Gadus morhua L.)
title_sort role of extracellular matrix components in pin bone attachments during storage—a comparison between farmed atlantic salmon (salmo salar) and cod (gadus morhua l.)
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5374190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27807712
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10695-016-0309-0
work_keys_str_mv AT rønningsisselb theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT østbyetonekari theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT krasnovaleksei theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT vuongtramt theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT veisethkenteva theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT kolsetsveino theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT pedersenmonae theroleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT rønningsisselb roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT østbyetonekari roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT krasnovaleksei roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT vuongtramt roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT veisethkenteva roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT kolsetsveino roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual
AT pedersenmonae roleofextracellularmatrixcomponentsinpinboneattachmentsduringstorageacomparisonbetweenfarmedatlanticsalmonsalmosalarandcodgadusmorhual