Cargando…

Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches

Untargeted metabolomics aims to provide a global picture of the metabolites present in the system under study. To this end, making a careful choice of sample preparation is mandatory to obtain reliable and reproducible biological information. In this study, eight different sample preparation techniq...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pezzatti, Julian, Bergé, Matthieu, Boccard, Julien, Codesido, Santiago, Gagnebin, Yoric, H. Viollier, Patrick, González-Ruiz, Víctor, Rudaz, Serge
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6836107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31547088
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo9100193
_version_ 1783466831178104832
author Pezzatti, Julian
Bergé, Matthieu
Boccard, Julien
Codesido, Santiago
Gagnebin, Yoric
H. Viollier, Patrick
González-Ruiz, Víctor
Rudaz, Serge
author_facet Pezzatti, Julian
Bergé, Matthieu
Boccard, Julien
Codesido, Santiago
Gagnebin, Yoric
H. Viollier, Patrick
González-Ruiz, Víctor
Rudaz, Serge
author_sort Pezzatti, Julian
collection PubMed
description Untargeted metabolomics aims to provide a global picture of the metabolites present in the system under study. To this end, making a careful choice of sample preparation is mandatory to obtain reliable and reproducible biological information. In this study, eight different sample preparation techniques were evaluated using Caulobacter crescentus as a model for Gram-negative bacteria. Two cell retrieval systems, two quenching and extraction solvents, and two cell disruption procedures were combined in a full factorial experimental design. To fully exploit the multivariate structure of the generated data, the ANOVA multiblock orthogonal partial least squares (AMOPLS) algorithm was employed to decompose the contribution of each factor studied and their potential interactions for a set of annotated metabolites. All main effects of the factors studied were found to have a significant contribution on the total observed variability. Cell retrieval, quenching and extraction solvent, and cell disrupting mechanism accounted respectively for 27.6%, 8.4%, and 7.0% of the total variability. The reproducibility and metabolome coverage of the sample preparation procedures were then compared and evaluated in terms of relative standard deviation (RSD) on the area for the detected metabolites. The protocol showing the best performance in terms of recovery, versatility, and variability was centrifugation for cell retrieval, using MeOH:H(2)O (8:2) as quenching and extraction solvent, and freeze-thaw cycles as the cell disrupting mechanism.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6836107
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68361072019-11-25 Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches Pezzatti, Julian Bergé, Matthieu Boccard, Julien Codesido, Santiago Gagnebin, Yoric H. Viollier, Patrick González-Ruiz, Víctor Rudaz, Serge Metabolites Article Untargeted metabolomics aims to provide a global picture of the metabolites present in the system under study. To this end, making a careful choice of sample preparation is mandatory to obtain reliable and reproducible biological information. In this study, eight different sample preparation techniques were evaluated using Caulobacter crescentus as a model for Gram-negative bacteria. Two cell retrieval systems, two quenching and extraction solvents, and two cell disruption procedures were combined in a full factorial experimental design. To fully exploit the multivariate structure of the generated data, the ANOVA multiblock orthogonal partial least squares (AMOPLS) algorithm was employed to decompose the contribution of each factor studied and their potential interactions for a set of annotated metabolites. All main effects of the factors studied were found to have a significant contribution on the total observed variability. Cell retrieval, quenching and extraction solvent, and cell disrupting mechanism accounted respectively for 27.6%, 8.4%, and 7.0% of the total variability. The reproducibility and metabolome coverage of the sample preparation procedures were then compared and evaluated in terms of relative standard deviation (RSD) on the area for the detected metabolites. The protocol showing the best performance in terms of recovery, versatility, and variability was centrifugation for cell retrieval, using MeOH:H(2)O (8:2) as quenching and extraction solvent, and freeze-thaw cycles as the cell disrupting mechanism. MDPI 2019-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6836107/ /pubmed/31547088 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo9100193 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Pezzatti, Julian
Bergé, Matthieu
Boccard, Julien
Codesido, Santiago
Gagnebin, Yoric
H. Viollier, Patrick
González-Ruiz, Víctor
Rudaz, Serge
Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches
title Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches
title_full Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches
title_fullStr Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches
title_full_unstemmed Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches
title_short Choosing an Optimal Sample Preparation in Caulobacter crescentus for Untargeted Metabolomics Approaches
title_sort choosing an optimal sample preparation in caulobacter crescentus for untargeted metabolomics approaches
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6836107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31547088
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/metabo9100193
work_keys_str_mv AT pezzattijulian choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT bergematthieu choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT boccardjulien choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT codesidosantiago choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT gagnebinyoric choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT hviollierpatrick choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT gonzalezruizvictor choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches
AT rudazserge choosinganoptimalsamplepreparationincaulobactercrescentusforuntargetedmetabolomicsapproaches