RNA-Seq Profiling Reveals Novel Hepatic Gene Expression Pattern in Aflatoxin B1 Treated Rats

Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.23). 04/2013; 8(4):e61768. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061768
Source: PubMed


Deep sequencing was used to investigate the subchronic effects of 1 ppm aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), a potent hepatocarcinogen, on the male rat liver transcriptome prior to onset of histopathological lesions or tumors. We hypothesized RNA-Seq would reveal more differentially expressed genes (DEG) than microarray analysis, including low copy and novel transcripts related to AFB1's carcinogenic activity compared to feed controls (CTRL). Paired-end reads were mapped to the rat genome (Rn4) with TopHat and further analyzed by DESeq and Cufflinks-Cuffdiff pipelines to identify differentially expressed transcripts, new exons and unannotated transcripts. PCA and cluster analysis of DEGs showed clear separation between AFB1 and CTRL treatments and concordance among group replicates. qPCR of eight high and medium DEGs and three low DEGs showed good comparability among RNA-Seq and microarray transcripts. DESeq analysis identified 1,026 differentially expressed transcripts at greater than two-fold change (p<0.005) compared to 626 transcripts by microarray due to base pair resolution of transcripts by RNA-Seq, probe placement within transcripts or an absence of probes to detect novel transcripts, splice variants and exons. Pathway analysis among DEGs revealed signaling of Ahr, Nrf2, GSH, xenobiotic, cell cycle, extracellular matrix, and cell differentiation networks consistent with pathways leading to AFB1 carcinogenesis, including almost 200 upregulated transcripts controlled by E2f1-related pathways related to kinetochore structure, mitotic spindle assembly and tissue remodeling. We report 49 novel, differentially-expressed transcripts including confirmation by PCR-cloning of two unique, unannotated, hepatic AFB1-responsive transcripts (HAfT's) on chromosomes 1.q55 and 15.q11, overexpressed by 10 to 25-fold. Several potentially novel exons were found and exon refinements were made including AFB1 exon-specific induction of homologous family members, Ugt1a6 and Ugt1a7c. We find the rat transcriptome contains many previously unidentified, AFB1-responsive exons and transcripts supporting RNA-Seq's capabilities to provide new insights into AFB1-mediated gene expression leading to hepatocellular carcinoma.

Download full-text


Available from: Raymond R Tice,
  • Source
    • "System-wide studies have been changing as new techniques become available; sequencing has changed the way genome-wide toxicology data is generated. Where microarrays have previously been used to generate expression profiles , RNA collection followed by deep sequencing (RNAseq ) has enhanced several toxicological studies [41] [42] [43]. For example, a recent study by Yang and colleagues (2014) used RNA-seq to elucidate the molecular effects of crotonaldehyde exposure on macrophage-like cells [44]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Systems biology and synthetic biology are emerging disciplines which are becoming increasingly utilised in several areas of bioscience. Toxicology is beginning to benefit from systems biology and we suggest in the future that is will also benefit from synthetic biology. Thus, a new era is on the horizon. This review illustrates how a suite of innovative techniques and tools can be applied to understanding complex health and toxicology issues. We review limitations confronted by the traditional computational approaches to toxicology and epidemiology research, using polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and their effects on adverse birth outcomes as an illustrative example. We introduce how systems toxicology (and their subdisciplines, genomic, proteomic, and metabolomic toxicology) will help to overcome such limitations. In particular, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of mathematical frameworks that computationally represent biological systems. Finally, we discuss the nascent discipline of synthetic biology and highlight relevant toxicological centred applications of this technique, including improvements in personalised medicine. We conclude this review by presenting a number of opportunities and challenges that could shape the future of these rapidly evolving disciplines.
    01/2015; 2015:14. DOI:10.1155/2015/575403
  • Source
    • "Cufflinks [8], [18], [23], DESeq [6], edgeR [22], etc.). Taking advantage of these tools, the power of the RNA-Seq approach to detect DEGs has been recently demonstrated [24]–[27]. However, there is no consensus on which analysis method is optimal, nor on how to approach a proper analysis to ensure validity of outcomes in terms of reproducibility, accuracy and robustness. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent advances in next-generation sequencing technology allow high-throughput cDNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) to be widely applied in transcriptomic studies, in particular for detecting differentially expressed genes between groups. Many software packages have been developed for the identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between treatment groups based on RNA-Seq data. However, there is a lack of consensus on how to approach an optimal study design and choice of suitable software for the analysis. In this comparative study we evaluate the performance of three of the most frequently used software tools: Cufflinks-Cuffdiff2, DESeq and edgeR. A number of important parameters of RNA-Seq technology were taken into consideration, including the number of replicates, sequencing depth, and balanced vs. unbalanced sequencing depth within and between groups. We benchmarked results relative to sets of DEGs identified through either quantitative RT-PCR or microarray. We observed that edgeR performs slightly better than DESeq and Cuffdiff2 in terms of the ability to uncover true positives. Overall, DESeq or taking the intersection of DEGs from two or more tools is recommended if the number of false positives is a major concern in the study. In other circumstances, edgeR is slightly preferable for differential expression analysis at the expense of potentially introducing more false positives.
    PLoS ONE 08/2014; 9(8):e103207. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0103207 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To identify mutant genes with high-frequency-risk-expression between lung adenocarcinoma samples and normal samples. Methods The RNA-Seq data GSE34914 and GSE37765 were downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus database, including 12 lung adenocarcinoma samples and 6 controls. All RNA-Seq reads were processed through TopHat and Cufflinks package and gene-expression level was calculated. Then, single nucleotide variation (SNV) was analyzed via SAM tool and the locations of mutant sites were recorded. In addition, the frequency and risk-level of mutant genes were calculated by using VarioWatch. GO (Gene Ontology) functional analysis was performed. The reported cancer genes were searched in TS genes, Cancer Genes and COSMIC database. ResultsThe SNV annotations of somatic mutation sites showed that 70 % of mutation sites in exon region were occurred in coding sequence (CDS). TRIP12 with highest frequency was identified. Total 118 mutant genes with high-frequency and high-risk were selected and significantly enriched into several GO terms. And no base mutation of CCNC or RAB11A was recorded. At a FPKM ≥ 56.5, CTNND1, DUSP6, MDH1 and RBM5, reported tumor suppressor genes, were identified. Notably, STAT2 was the only one transcription factor (TF) with high-risk mutation and its expression was detected. Conclusion For the mutant genes with high-frequency-risk-expression, CTNND1, DUSP6, MDH1 and RBM5 were identified. Besides, TRIP12 might be a potential cancer-related gene and expression of TF STAT2 with high-risk was detected. These candidate mutant genes might promote the development of lung adenocarcinoma and provided new diagnostic potential targets for the treatment.
    Thoracic Cancer 11/2013; 5(3). DOI:10.1111/1759-7714.12080 · 0.90 Impact Factor
Show more