Cargando…
Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat
The objective of this work was to demonstrate how the extraction method affects the reliability of biomarker detection and how this detection depends on the biomarker location within the cell compartment. Different extraction methods were used to study the sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar fractions of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8156798/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34063396 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods10051097 |
_version_ | 1783699532471599104 |
---|---|
author | González-Blanco, Laura Diñeiro, Yolanda Díaz-Luis, Andrea Coto-Montes, Ana Oliván, Mamen Sierra, Verónica |
author_facet | González-Blanco, Laura Diñeiro, Yolanda Díaz-Luis, Andrea Coto-Montes, Ana Oliván, Mamen Sierra, Verónica |
author_sort | González-Blanco, Laura |
collection | PubMed |
description | The objective of this work was to demonstrate how the extraction method affects the reliability of biomarker detection and how this detection depends on the biomarker location within the cell compartment. Different extraction methods were used to study the sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar fractions of the Longissimus thoracis et lumborum muscle of young bulls of the Asturiana de los Valles breed in two quality grades, standard (Control) or dark, firm, and dry (DFD) meat. Protein extractability and the expression of some of the main meat quality biomarkers—oxidative status (lipoperoxidation (LPO) and catalase activity (CAT)), proteome (SDS-PAGE electrophoretic pattern), and cell stress protein (Hsp70)—were analyzed. In the sarcoplasmic fraction, buffers containing Triton X-100 showed significantly higher protein extractability, LPO, and higher intensity of high-molecular-weight protein bands, whereas the TES buffer was more sensitive to distinguishing differences in the protein pattern between the Control and DFD meat. In the myofibrillar fraction, samples extracted with the lysis buffer showed significantly higher protein extractability, whereas samples extracted with the non-denaturing buffer showed higher results for LPO, CAT, and Hsp70, and higher-intensity bands in the electrophoretic pattern. These findings highlight the need for the careful selection of the extraction method used to analyze the different biomarkers considering their cellular location to adapt the extractive process. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8156798 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81567982021-05-28 Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat González-Blanco, Laura Diñeiro, Yolanda Díaz-Luis, Andrea Coto-Montes, Ana Oliván, Mamen Sierra, Verónica Foods Article The objective of this work was to demonstrate how the extraction method affects the reliability of biomarker detection and how this detection depends on the biomarker location within the cell compartment. Different extraction methods were used to study the sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar fractions of the Longissimus thoracis et lumborum muscle of young bulls of the Asturiana de los Valles breed in two quality grades, standard (Control) or dark, firm, and dry (DFD) meat. Protein extractability and the expression of some of the main meat quality biomarkers—oxidative status (lipoperoxidation (LPO) and catalase activity (CAT)), proteome (SDS-PAGE electrophoretic pattern), and cell stress protein (Hsp70)—were analyzed. In the sarcoplasmic fraction, buffers containing Triton X-100 showed significantly higher protein extractability, LPO, and higher intensity of high-molecular-weight protein bands, whereas the TES buffer was more sensitive to distinguishing differences in the protein pattern between the Control and DFD meat. In the myofibrillar fraction, samples extracted with the lysis buffer showed significantly higher protein extractability, whereas samples extracted with the non-denaturing buffer showed higher results for LPO, CAT, and Hsp70, and higher-intensity bands in the electrophoretic pattern. These findings highlight the need for the careful selection of the extraction method used to analyze the different biomarkers considering their cellular location to adapt the extractive process. MDPI 2021-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8156798/ /pubmed/34063396 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods10051097 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article González-Blanco, Laura Diñeiro, Yolanda Díaz-Luis, Andrea Coto-Montes, Ana Oliván, Mamen Sierra, Verónica Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat |
title | Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat |
title_full | Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat |
title_fullStr | Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat |
title_short | Impact of Extraction Method on the Detection of Quality Biomarkers in Normal vs. DFD Meat |
title_sort | impact of extraction method on the detection of quality biomarkers in normal vs. dfd meat |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8156798/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34063396 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods10051097 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gonzalezblancolaura impactofextractionmethodonthedetectionofqualitybiomarkersinnormalvsdfdmeat AT dineiroyolanda impactofextractionmethodonthedetectionofqualitybiomarkersinnormalvsdfdmeat AT diazluisandrea impactofextractionmethodonthedetectionofqualitybiomarkersinnormalvsdfdmeat AT cotomontesana impactofextractionmethodonthedetectionofqualitybiomarkersinnormalvsdfdmeat AT olivanmamen impactofextractionmethodonthedetectionofqualitybiomarkersinnormalvsdfdmeat AT sierraveronica impactofextractionmethodonthedetectionofqualitybiomarkersinnormalvsdfdmeat |