A comparative Proteomics Analysis Identified Differentially Expressed Proteins in Pancreatic Cancer–Associated Stellate Cell Small Extracellular Vesicles

Human pancreatic stellate cells (HPSCs) are an essential stromal component and mediators of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) progression. Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are membrane-enclosed nanoparticles involved in cell-to-cell communications and are released from stromal cells within PDAC. A detailed comparison of sEVs from normal pancreatic stellate cells (HPaStec) and from PDAC-associated stellate cells (HPSCs) remains a gap in our current knowledge regarding stellate cells and PDAC. We hypothesized there would be differences in sEVs secretion and protein expression that might contribute to PDAC biology. To test this hypothesis, we isolated sEVs using ultracentrifugation followed by characterization by electron microscopy and Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis. We report here our initial observations. First, HPSC cells derived from PDAC tumors secrete a higher volume of sEVs when compared to normal pancreatic stellate cells (HPaStec). Although our data revealed that both normal and tumor-derived sEVs demonstrated no significant biological effect on cancer cells, we observed efficient uptake of sEVs by both normal and cancer epithelial cells. Additionally, intact membrane-associated proteins on sEVs were essential for efficient uptake. We then compared sEV proteins isolated from HPSCs and HPaStecs cells using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry. Most of the 1481 protein groups identified were shared with the exosome database, ExoCarta. Eighty-seven protein groups were differentially expressed (selected by 2-fold difference and adjusted p value ≤0.05) between HPSC and HPaStec sEVs. Of note, HPSC sEVs contained dramatically more CSE1L (chromosome segregation 1–like protein), a described marker of poor prognosis in patients with pancreatic cancer. Based on our results, we have demonstrated unique populations of sEVs originating from stromal cells with PDAC and suggest that these are significant to cancer biology. Further studies should be undertaken to gain a deeper understanding that could drive novel therapy.     

Small Molecular Inhibitors Block TRPM4 Currents in Prostate Cancer Cells,with Limited Impact on Cancer Hallmark Functions

Transient receptor potential melastatin 4 (TRPM4) is a broadly expressed Ca²⁺ activated monovalent cation channel that contributes to the pathophysiology of several diseases.For this study, we generated stable CRISPR/Cas9 TRPM4 knockout (K.O.) cells from the human prostate cancer cell line DU145 and analyzed the cells for changes in cancer hallmark functions. Both TRPM4-K.O. clones demonstrated lower proliferation and viability compared to the parental cells. Migration was also impaired in the TRPM4-K.O. cells. Additionally, analysis of 210 prostate cancer patient tissues demonstrates a positive association between TRPM4 protein expression and local/metastatic progression. Moreover, a decreased adhesion rate was detected in the two K.O. clones compared to DU145 cells.Next, we tested three novel TRPM4 inhibitors with whole-cell patch clamp technique for their potential to block TRPM4 currents. CBA, NBA and LBA partially inhibited TRPM4 currents in DU145 cells. However, none of these inhibitors demonstrated any TRPM4-specific effect in the cellular assays.To evaluate if the observed effect of TRPM4 K.O. on migration, viability, and cell cycle is linked to TRPM4 ion conductivity, we transfected TRPM4-K.O. cells with either TRPM4 wild-type or a dominant-negative mutant, non-permeable to Na⁺. Our data showed a partial rescue of the viability of cells expressing functional TRPM4, while the pore mutant was not able to rescue this phenotype. For cell cycle distribution, TRPM4 ion conductivity was not essential since TRPM4 wild-type and the pore mutant rescued the phenotype.In conclusion, TRPM4 contributes to viability, migration, cell cycle shift, and adhesion; however, blocking TRPM4 ion conductivity is insufficient to prevent its role in cancer hallmark functions in prostate cancer cells.     

Membrane Binding and Homodimerization of Atg16 Via Two Distinct Protein Regions is Essential for Autophagy in Yeast

Macroautophagy is a bulk degradation mechanism in eukaryotic cells. Efficiency of an essential step of this process in yeast, Atg8 lipidation, relies on the presence of Atg16, a subunit of the Atg12–Atg5-Atg16 complex acting as the E3-like enzyme in the ubiquitination-like reaction. A current view on the functional structure of Atg16 in the yeast S. cerevisiae comes from the two crystal structures that reveal the Atg5-interacting α-helix linked via a flexible linker to another α-helix of Atg16, which then assembles into a homodimer. This view does not explain the results of previous in vitro studies revealing Atg16-dependent deformations of membranes and liposome-binding of the Atg12–Atg5 conjugate upon addition of Atg16. Here we show that Atg16 acts as both a homodimerizing and peripheral membrane-binding polypeptide. These two characteristics are imposed by the two distinct regions that are disordered in the nascent protein. Atg16 binds to membranes in vivo via the amphipathic α-helix (amino acid residues 113–131) that has a coiled-coil-like propensity and a strong hydrophobic face for insertion into the membrane. The other protein region (residues 64–99) possesses a coiled-coil propensity, but not amphipathicity, and is dispensable for membrane anchoring of Atg16. This region acts as a Leu-zipper essential for formation of the Atg16 homodimer. Mutagenic disruption in either of these two distinct domains renders Atg16 proteins that, in contrast to wild type, completely fail to rescue the autophagy-defective phenotype of atg16Δ cells. Together, the results of this study yield a model for the molecular mechanism of Atg16 function in macroautophagy.     

Review: Assessment of completeness of reporting in intervention studies using livestock: an example from pain mitigation interventions in neonatal piglets

Accurate and complete reporting of study methods, results and interpretation are essential components for any scientific process, allowing end-users to evaluate the internal and external validity of a study. When animals are used in research, excellence in reporting is expected as a matter of continued ethical acceptability of animal use in the sciences. Our primary objective was to assess completeness of reporting for a series of studies relevant to mitigation of pain in neonatal piglets undergoing routine management procedures. Our second objective was to illustrate how authors can report the items in the Reporting guidElines For randomized controLled trials for livEstoCk and food safety (REFLECT) statement using examples from the animal welfare science literature. A total of 52 studies from 40 articles were evaluated using a modified REFLECT statement. No single study reported all REFLECT checklist items. Seven studies reported specific objectives with testable hypotheses. Six studies identified primary or secondary outcomes. Randomization and blinding were considered to be partially reported in 21 and 18 studies, respectively. No studies reported the rationale for sample sizes. Several studies failed to report key design features such as units for measurement, means, standard deviations, standard errors for continuous outcomes or comparative characteristics for categorical outcomes expressed as either rates or proportions. In the discipline of animal welfare science, authors, reviewers and editors are encouraged to use available reporting guidelines to ensure that scientific methods and results are adequately described and free of misrepresentations and inaccuracies. Complete and accurate reporting increases the ability to apply the results of studies to the decision-making process and prevent wastage of financial and animal resources.     

An “orientation sphere” visualization for examining animal head movements

1. Animal behavior is elicited, in part, in response to external conditions, but understanding how animals perceive the environment and make the decisions that bring about these behavioral responses is challenging.
2. Animal heads often move during specific behaviors and, additionally, typically have sensory systems (notably vision, smell, and hearing) sampling in defined arcs (normally to the front of their heads). As such, head‐mounted electronic sensors consisting of accelerometers and magnetometers, which can be used to determine the movement and directionality of animal heads (where head “movement” is defined here as changes in heading [azimuth] and/or pitch [elevation angle]), can potentially provide information both on behaviors in general and also clarify which parts of the environment the animals might be prioritizing (“environmental framing”).
3. We propose a new approach to visualize the data of such head‐mounted tags that combines the instantaneous outputs of head heading and pitch in a single intuitive spherical plot. This sphere has magnetic heading denoted by “longitude” position and head pitch by “latitude” on this “orientation sphere” (O‐sphere).
4. We construct the O‐sphere for the head rotations of a number of vertebrates with contrasting body shape and ecology (oryx, sheep, tortoises, and turtles), illustrating various behaviors, including foraging, walking, and environmental scanning. We also propose correcting head orientations for body orientations to highlight specific heading‐independent head rotation, and propose the derivation of O‐sphere‐metrics, such as angular speed across the sphere. This should help identify the functions of various head behaviors.
5. Visualizations of the O‐sphere provide an intuitive representation of animal behavior manifest via head orientation and rotation. This has ramifications for quantifying and understanding behaviors ranging from navigation through vigilance to feeding and, when used in tandem with body movement, should provide an important link between perception of the environment and response to it in free‐ranging animals.

     

Effects of a participatory approach,with systematic impact matrix analysis in herd health planning in organic dairy cattle herds

The animal health and welfare status in European organic dairy production does not in all aspects meet the organic principles and consumers’ expectations and needs to be improved. To achieve this, tailored herd health planning, targeted to the specific situation of individual farms could be of use. The aim of this study was to apply herd health planning in a structured participatory approach, with impact matrix analysis, not previously used in this context, in European organic dairy farms and to assess changes in animal health and welfare. Herd health planning farm visits were conducted on 122 organic dairy farms in France, Germany and Sweden. The farmer, the herd veterinarian and/or an advisor took part in the farm discussions. The researcher served as facilitator. Baseline data on the animal health status of the individual farm, collected from national milk recording schemes, were presented as an input for the discussion. Thereafter a systematic impact matrix analysis was performed. This was to capture the complexity of individual farms with the aim to identify the farm-specific factors that could have a strong impact on animal health. The participants (i.e. farmer, veterinarian and advisor) jointly identified areas in need of improvement, taking the health status and the interconnected farm system components into account, and appropriate actions were jointly identified. The researcher took minutes during the discussions, and these were shared with the participants. No intervention was made by the researcher, and further actions were left with the participants. The number of actions per farm ranged from 0 to 22. The change in mortality, metabolic diseases, reproductive performance and udder health was assessed at two time points, and potential determinators of the change were evaluated with linear regression models. A significant association was seen between change in udder health, as measured by the somatic cell count, and country. At the first follow-up, a significant association was also found between change in the proportion of prolonged calving interval and the farmers’ desire to improve reproductive health as well as with an increase in herd size, but this was not seen at the second follow-up. The degree of implementation of the actions was good (median 67%, lower quartile 40%, upper quartile 83%). To conclude, the degree of implementation was quite high, improvement of animal health could not be linked to the herd health planning approach. However, the approach was highly appreciated by the participants and deserves further study.     

Plant–animal interactions between carnivorous plants,sheet‐web spiders,and ground‐running spiders as guild predators in a wet meadow community

1. Plant–animal interactions are diverse and widespread shaping ecology, evolution, and biodiversity of most ecological communities. Carnivorous plants are unusual in that they can be simultaneously engaged with animals in multiple mutualistic and antagonistic interactions including reversed plant–animal interactions where they are the predator. Competition with animals is a potential antagonistic plant–animal interaction unique to carnivorous plants when they and animal predators consume the same prey.
2. The goal of this field study was to test the hypothesis that under natural conditions, sundews and spiders are predators consuming the same prey thus creating an environment where interkingdom competition can occur.
3. Over 12 months, we collected data on 15 dates in the only protected Highland Rim Wet Meadow Ecosystem in Kentucky where sundews, sheet‐web spiders, and ground‐running spiders co‐exist. One each sampling day, we attempted to locate fifteen sites with: (a) both sheet‐web spiders and sundews; (b) sundews only; and (c) where neither occurred. Sticky traps were set at each of these sites to determine prey (springtails) activity–density. Ground‐running spiders were collected on sampling days. DNA extraction was performed on all spiders to determine which individuals had eaten springtails and comparing this to the density of sundews where the spiders were captured.
4. Sundews and spiders consumed springtails. Springtail activity–densities were lower, the higher the density of sundews. Both sheet‐web and ground‐running spiders were found less often where sundew densities were high. Sheet‐web size was smaller where sundew densities were high.
5. The results of this study suggest that asymmetrical exploitative competition occurs between sundews and spiders. Sundews appear to have a greater negative impact on spiders, where spiders probably have little impact on sundews. In this example of interkingdom competition where the asymmetry should be most extreme, amensalism where one competitor experiences no cost of interaction may be occurring.

     

Haematobia irritans parasitism of F1 yak × beef cattle (Bos grunniens × Bos taurus) hybrids

The horn fly Haematobia irritans (Diptera: Muscidae) is a blood obligate ectoparasite of bovids that causes annual losses to the U.S. beef cattle industry of over US$1.75 billion. Climate warming, the anthropogenic dispersion of bovids and the cross‐breeding of beef cattle with other bovid species may facilitate novel horn fly–host interactions. In particular, hybridizing yaks [Bos grunniens (Artiodactyla: Bovidae)] with beef cows (Bos taurus) for heterosis and carcass improvements may increase the exposure of yak × beef hybrids to horn flies. The present paper reports on the collection of digital images of commingled beef heifers (n = 12) and F1 yak × beef hybrid bovids (heifers, n = 7; steers, n = 5) near Laramie, Wyoming (～ 2200 m a.s.l.) in 2018. The total numbers of horn flies on beef heifers and F1 yak × beef heifers [mean ± standard error (SE): 88 ± 13 and 70 ± 17, respectively] did not differ significantly; however, F1 yak × beef steers had greater total horn fly abundance (mean ± SE: 159 ± 39) than female bovids. The present report of this experiment is the first such report in the literature and suggests that F1 yak × beef bovids are as susceptible as cattle to horn fly parasitism. Therefore, similar monitoring and treatment practices should be adopted by veterinarians, entomologists and producers.