Cargando…

Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods

BACKGROUND: Tear proteomic analysis has become an important tool in medical and veterinary research. The tear collection method could influence the tear protein profile. This study aims to evaluate the protein profiles of dog tears collected using microcapillary tubes (MT), Schirmer tear strips (ST)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ritchoo, Sudpatchara, Havanapan, Phattara-orn, Phungthanom, Nuanwan, Rucksaken, Rucksak, Muikaew, Rattana, Sussadee, Metita
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36539822
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-022-03543-7
_version_ 1784854270678401024
author Ritchoo, Sudpatchara
Havanapan, Phattara-orn
Phungthanom, Nuanwan
Rucksaken, Rucksak
Muikaew, Rattana
Sussadee, Metita
author_facet Ritchoo, Sudpatchara
Havanapan, Phattara-orn
Phungthanom, Nuanwan
Rucksaken, Rucksak
Muikaew, Rattana
Sussadee, Metita
author_sort Ritchoo, Sudpatchara
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Tear proteomic analysis has become an important tool in medical and veterinary research. The tear collection method could influence the tear protein profile. This study aims to evaluate the protein profiles of dog tears collected using microcapillary tubes (MT), Schirmer tear strips (ST), and ophthalmic sponges (OS). METHODS: The tear samples were collected using MT, ST, and OS. Tear protein profiles were analyzed using two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) and the different protein spots’ expression was compared. Fourteen protein spots were identified using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). RESULTS: Tear protein concentrations ranged from 2.80 to 4.03 μg/μL, with no statistically significant differences among collection methods. Protein expression in each collection method differed in terms of both the number and intensity of the spots. There were 249, 327, and 330 protein spots found from tears collected with MT, ST, and OS, respectively. The proteins albumin, haptoglobin, and lactoferrin identified from OS were found to have higher spot intensities than other methods of collection. The use of MT demonstrated the downregulation of nine proteins. CONCLUSIONS: The recent study supported that tear protein analysis is affected by different tear collection methods. Although ST is commonly used for tear collection, it provides insufficient information to study particular tear proteins. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12917-022-03543-7.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9768899
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97688992022-12-22 Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods Ritchoo, Sudpatchara Havanapan, Phattara-orn Phungthanom, Nuanwan Rucksaken, Rucksak Muikaew, Rattana Sussadee, Metita BMC Vet Res Research BACKGROUND: Tear proteomic analysis has become an important tool in medical and veterinary research. The tear collection method could influence the tear protein profile. This study aims to evaluate the protein profiles of dog tears collected using microcapillary tubes (MT), Schirmer tear strips (ST), and ophthalmic sponges (OS). METHODS: The tear samples were collected using MT, ST, and OS. Tear protein profiles were analyzed using two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) and the different protein spots’ expression was compared. Fourteen protein spots were identified using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). RESULTS: Tear protein concentrations ranged from 2.80 to 4.03 μg/μL, with no statistically significant differences among collection methods. Protein expression in each collection method differed in terms of both the number and intensity of the spots. There were 249, 327, and 330 protein spots found from tears collected with MT, ST, and OS, respectively. The proteins albumin, haptoglobin, and lactoferrin identified from OS were found to have higher spot intensities than other methods of collection. The use of MT demonstrated the downregulation of nine proteins. CONCLUSIONS: The recent study supported that tear protein analysis is affected by different tear collection methods. Although ST is commonly used for tear collection, it provides insufficient information to study particular tear proteins. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12917-022-03543-7. BioMed Central 2022-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9768899/ /pubmed/36539822 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-022-03543-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Ritchoo, Sudpatchara
Havanapan, Phattara-orn
Phungthanom, Nuanwan
Rucksaken, Rucksak
Muikaew, Rattana
Sussadee, Metita
Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
title Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
title_full Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
title_fullStr Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
title_full_unstemmed Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
title_short Analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
title_sort analysis and comparison of tear protein profiles in dogs using different tear collection methods
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9768899/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36539822
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-022-03543-7
work_keys_str_mv AT ritchoosudpatchara analysisandcomparisonoftearproteinprofilesindogsusingdifferenttearcollectionmethods
AT havanapanphattaraorn analysisandcomparisonoftearproteinprofilesindogsusingdifferenttearcollectionmethods
AT phungthanomnuanwan analysisandcomparisonoftearproteinprofilesindogsusingdifferenttearcollectionmethods
AT rucksakenrucksak analysisandcomparisonoftearproteinprofilesindogsusingdifferenttearcollectionmethods
AT muikaewrattana analysisandcomparisonoftearproteinprofilesindogsusingdifferenttearcollectionmethods
AT sussadeemetita analysisandcomparisonoftearproteinprofilesindogsusingdifferenttearcollectionmethods