Dataset Information

Evaluation of sample preparation methods for NMR-based metabolomics of cow milk

ABSTRACT: The quality of milk metabolome analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is greatly influenced by the way samples are prepared. Although this analytical method is increasingly used to study milk metabolites, a thorough examination of available sample preparation protocols for milk has not been reported yet. We evaluated the performance of eight milk preparation methods namely (1) raw milk without any processing; (2) skimmed milk; (3) ultrafiltered milk; (4) skimming followed by ultrafiltration; (5) ultracentrifuged milk; (6) methanol; (7) dichloromethane; and (8) methanol/dichloromethane, in terms of spectra quality, repeatability, signal-to-noise ratio, extraction efficiency and yield criteria. A pooled sample of milk was used for all protocols. Skimming, ultracentrifugation and unprocessed milk protocols showed poor NMR spectra quality. Protocols involving multiple steps, namely methanol/dichloromethane extraction, and skimming followed by ultrafiltration produced inadequate results for signal-to-noise ratio parameter. Methanol and skimming associated to ultrafiltration provided good repeatability results compared to the other protocols. Chemical-based sample preparation protocols, particularly methanol, showed more efficient metabolite extraction compared to physical preparation methods. When considering all evaluation parameters, the methanol extraction protocol proved to be the best method. As a proof of utility, methanol protocol was then applied to milk samples from dairy cows fed a diet with or without a feed additive, showing a clear separation between the two groups of cows.

INSTRUMENT(S): Bruker

SUBMITTER: Bénédict Yanibada

PROVIDER: MTBLS623 | MetaboLights | 2019-06-13

REPOSITORIES: MetaboLights

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of sample preparation methods for NMR-based metabolomics of cow milk.

Yanibada Bénédict B Boudra Hamid H Debrauwer Laurent L Martin Cécile C Morgavi Diego P DP Canlet Cécile C

Heliyon 20181019 10

The quality of milk metabolome analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is greatly influenced by the way samples are prepared. Although this analytical method is increasingly used to study milk metabolites, a thorough examination of available sample preparation protocols for milk has not been reported yet. We evaluated the performance of eight milk preparation methods namely (1) raw milk without any processing; (2) skimmed milk; (3) ultrafiltered milk; (4) skimming followed by ultrafiltratio ...[more]

PMID: 30364606

Similar Datasets

Project description:The continuing ‘desire’ in obtaining more quantitative and detailed information from cellular proteomics experiments in regards to proteome coverage and protein modifications asks for a systematic investigation of the protein extraction and digestion protocols, in particular when working with unicellular organisms with a strong cell wall such as the model yeast S. cerevisiae. The selection of a suitable sample preparation workflow is crucial to obtain in-depth proteome coverage, as the use of certain sample preparation protocols may bias the protein identification or induce (unexpected) peptide modifications. Here, we made an extensive comparison of preparation workflows commonly applied to S. cerevisiae. Workflows were compared on the basis of identified MS/MS spectra, peptide sequences and number and type of modifications using both restricted (Peaks) and unrestricted (TagGraph) database search approaches. The proteome coverage was mainly affected by the sample collection approach, while it was maximized using a FASP. Extensive reagent specific peptide modifications were detected when using formic acid, but also when using acetone. Such artefacts split the analyte mass signals and generate additional chemical noise that may also elute differently compared to the native peptide. The use of both an unrestricted and restricted database search increased identification rates significantly and resulted in the identification of approximately 70% of the MS2 spectra for the best protocol. The unidentified spectra were assessed by their de novo sequencing score. This confirmed that those spectra consisted by a majority of very low quality spectra, insufficient to match to database sequences. However, a small fraction of the unidentified spectra showed high quality, which presumably derive from unknown sequence variants not present in the database. This study demonstrates the high importance of the sample preparation workflow and the obtained results will guide researchers in the field to optimize sample preparation procedures.

Project description:Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues have many advantages for identification of risk biomarkers, including wide availability and potential for extended follow-up endpoints. However, RNA derived from archival FFPE samples has limited quality. Here we identified parameters that determine which FFPE samples have the potential for successful RNA extraction, library preparation, and generation of usable RNAseq data. We optimized library preparation protocols designed for use with FFPE samples using seven FFPE and Fresh Frozen replicate pairs, and tested optimized protocols using a study set of 130 FFPE biopsies from women with benign breast disease. Metrics from RNA extraction and preparation procedures were collected and compared with bioinformatics sequencing summary statistics. Finally, a decision tree model was built to learn the relationship between pre-sequencing lab metrics and qc pass/fail status as determined by bioinformatics metrics.. Samples that failed bioinformatics qc tended to have low median sample-wise correlation within the cohort (Spearman correlation < 0.75), low number of reads mapped to gene regions (< 25 million), or low number of detectable genes (11,400 # of detected genes with TPM > 4). The median RNA concentration and pre-capture library Qubit values for qc failed samples were 18.9 ng/ul and 2.08 ng/ul respectively, which were significantly lower than those of qc pass samples (40.8 ng/ul and 5.82 ng/ul). We built a decision tree model based on input RNA concentration, input library qubit values, and achieved an F score of 0.848 in predicting QC status (pass/fail) of FFPE samples. We provide a bioinformatics quality control recommendation for FFPE samples from breast tissue by evaluating bioinformatic and sample metrics. Our results suggest a minimum concentration of 25 ng/ul FFPE-extracted RNA for library preparation and 1.7 ng/ul pre-capture library output to achieve adequate RNA-seq data for downstream bioinformatics analysis.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of sample preparation methods for NMR-based metabolomics of cow milk

Publications

Evaluation of sample preparation methods for NMR-based metabolomics of cow milk.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure