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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: González-Blanco, Laura, Diñeiro, Yolanda, Díaz-Luis, Andrea, Coto-Montes, Ana, Oliván, Mamen, Sierra, Verónica
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