4.5 Article

Mouse Urinary Biomarkers Provide Signatures of Maturation, Diet, Stress Level, and Diurnal Rhythm

期刊

CHEMICAL SENSES
卷 35, 期 6, 页码 459-471

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/chemse/bjq032

关键词

age; diet; solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry; stress; urine; volatile organic compound

资金

  1. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency under the Army Research Office [DAAD-19-03-0069]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R21DC008576]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Body fluids such as urine potentially contain a wealth of information pertaining to age, sex, social and reproductive status, physiologic state, and genotype of the donor. To explore whether urine could encode information regarding environment, physiology, and development, we compared the volatile compositions of mouse urine using solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (SPME-GC/MS). Specifically, we identified volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in individual urine samples taken from inbred C57BL/6J-H-2(b) mice under several experimental conditions-maturation state, diet, stress, and diurnal rhythms, designed to mimic natural variations. Approximately 1000 peaks (i.e., variables) were identified per comparison and of these many were identified as potential differential biomarkers. Consistent with previous findings, we found groups of compounds that vary significantly and consistently rather than a single unique compound to provide a robust signature. We identified over 49 new predictive compounds, in addition to identifying several published compounds, for maturation state, diet, stress, and time-of-day. We found a considerable degree of overlap in the chemicals identified as (potential) biomarkers for each comparison. Chemometric methods indicate that the strong group-related patterns in VOCs provide sufficient information to identify several parameters of natural variations in this strain of mice including their maturation state, stress level, and diet.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据