Cargando…

Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The external surfaces of fish, including the skin, are covered by mucus. Mucus is an important and multifunctional matrix of substantial complexity. The mucus is viscous and sticky, and adheres to the underlying epithelium, making the sampling of mucus challenging. To help define mor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tartor, Haitham, Luis Monjane, Adérito, Grove, Søren
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32784772
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10081374
_version_ 1783576585427746816
author Tartor, Haitham
Luis Monjane, Adérito
Grove, Søren
author_facet Tartor, Haitham
Luis Monjane, Adérito
Grove, Søren
author_sort Tartor, Haitham
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: The external surfaces of fish, including the skin, are covered by mucus. Mucus is an important and multifunctional matrix of substantial complexity. The mucus is viscous and sticky, and adheres to the underlying epithelium, making the sampling of mucus challenging. To help define more standardized protocols for mucus sampling, we here compare three different sampling methods. The methods include scraping of mucus, wiping of mucus, and absorption of the liquid part of mucus. We compare the resulting damage to the fish skin and compare the content of two specific immune proteins in the three sample types. Using histological examination, we show that absorption leads to very limited damage to the skin epithelium while scraping causes substantial damage. Using Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) methods, we show that the mucus sample types contain similar amounts of antigen specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) and complement component 5 (C5), respectively. The levels of the IgM but not the C5 were moderately correlated between mucus and blood from the same fish, suggesting the importance of fish skin mucus for analyzing antigen-specific IgM after vaccination procedures. We conclude that absorption is an easily performed and minimally invasive sampling method that produces mucus samples with comparable contents of IgM and C5. ABSTRACT: Protocols used to collect fish skin mucus may inadvertently compromise the sampled fish or the resulting sample. Here, we used three methods (wiping, scraping, and absorption) to collect skin mucus from Atlantic salmon and compared their invasiveness on fish skin epithelium. We found that the absorption method was the least invasive. We also compared the abundance of antigen-specific immunoglobulin M subtype A antibodies (IgM-A Ab) and complement component 5 (C5) in mucus samples collected from vaccinated fish by the three methods. An enzyme-cascade-amplification strategy colorimetric immune assay was optimized and used to analyze IgM-A, and ELISA was used to analyze C5. The abundance of antigen-specific IgM-A in skin mucus was comparable between the three methods, but C5 was significantly lower in absorbed mucus in comparison to in the wiped or scraped mucus samples. Absorbed skin mucus samples collected from various body regions of salmon, levels of C5 were comparable, while specific IgM-A amounts varied between the regions. By comparing three mucus-absorbing materials (medical wipe, gauze, and cotton) for their ability to absorb and release IgM-A and C5, medical wipes proved to be ideal for IgM-A analysis, whereas gauze was the best for C5 analysis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7460368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74603682020-09-02 Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA Tartor, Haitham Luis Monjane, Adérito Grove, Søren Animals (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: The external surfaces of fish, including the skin, are covered by mucus. Mucus is an important and multifunctional matrix of substantial complexity. The mucus is viscous and sticky, and adheres to the underlying epithelium, making the sampling of mucus challenging. To help define more standardized protocols for mucus sampling, we here compare three different sampling methods. The methods include scraping of mucus, wiping of mucus, and absorption of the liquid part of mucus. We compare the resulting damage to the fish skin and compare the content of two specific immune proteins in the three sample types. Using histological examination, we show that absorption leads to very limited damage to the skin epithelium while scraping causes substantial damage. Using Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) methods, we show that the mucus sample types contain similar amounts of antigen specific immunoglobulin M (IgM) and complement component 5 (C5), respectively. The levels of the IgM but not the C5 were moderately correlated between mucus and blood from the same fish, suggesting the importance of fish skin mucus for analyzing antigen-specific IgM after vaccination procedures. We conclude that absorption is an easily performed and minimally invasive sampling method that produces mucus samples with comparable contents of IgM and C5. ABSTRACT: Protocols used to collect fish skin mucus may inadvertently compromise the sampled fish or the resulting sample. Here, we used three methods (wiping, scraping, and absorption) to collect skin mucus from Atlantic salmon and compared their invasiveness on fish skin epithelium. We found that the absorption method was the least invasive. We also compared the abundance of antigen-specific immunoglobulin M subtype A antibodies (IgM-A Ab) and complement component 5 (C5) in mucus samples collected from vaccinated fish by the three methods. An enzyme-cascade-amplification strategy colorimetric immune assay was optimized and used to analyze IgM-A, and ELISA was used to analyze C5. The abundance of antigen-specific IgM-A in skin mucus was comparable between the three methods, but C5 was significantly lower in absorbed mucus in comparison to in the wiped or scraped mucus samples. Absorbed skin mucus samples collected from various body regions of salmon, levels of C5 were comparable, while specific IgM-A amounts varied between the regions. By comparing three mucus-absorbing materials (medical wipe, gauze, and cotton) for their ability to absorb and release IgM-A and C5, medical wipes proved to be ideal for IgM-A analysis, whereas gauze was the best for C5 analysis. MDPI 2020-08-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7460368/ /pubmed/32784772 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10081374 Text en © 2020 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
Tartor, Haitham
Luis Monjane, Adérito
Grove, Søren
Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA
title Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA
title_full Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA
title_fullStr Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA
title_full_unstemmed Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA
title_short Quantification of Defensive Proteins in Skin Mucus of Atlantic salmon Using Minimally Invasive Sampling and High-Sensitivity ELISA
title_sort quantification of defensive proteins in skin mucus of atlantic salmon using minimally invasive sampling and high-sensitivity elisa
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32784772
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani10081374
work_keys_str_mv AT tartorhaitham quantificationofdefensiveproteinsinskinmucusofatlanticsalmonusingminimallyinvasivesamplingandhighsensitivityelisa
AT luismonjaneaderito quantificationofdefensiveproteinsinskinmucusofatlanticsalmonusingminimallyinvasivesamplingandhighsensitivityelisa
AT grovesøren quantificationofdefensiveproteinsinskinmucusofatlanticsalmonusingminimallyinvasivesamplingandhighsensitivityelisa