A cCombined
approach
of genomics and metabolomicsgenomic/metabolomic
approach
to differentiatione of the geographical
origins of natural products: deer antlers as an example[JH1] .
Abstract
The dDeer
antlers have been used asas medicalmedicinal
or health products for hundreds of years in orientalEast
Asian countries. As Tthe
healthypositive
physiological effects of deer antlers dependcorrelate
strongly onwith their chemical
components, thatwhich
can vary hugelywidely according
to the
geographical sourcesorigin,
of
the deers, which makes correct indicationidentification
of the sourcesthose origins
is
essential forto their quality
control. To address this[JH2] In the present study,
we applied both genomicetics
and metabolomics approaches to the
origin-identification for theof
samples from Canada, New Zealand and Korea. The genomicetic
approach employing mictochondirial
DNA sequencing gaveprovided the
distribution of the deer species in each country, but failed to categorize all the
samples, due to the presence of identical
species in different countiries.
The
NMR[JH3] -based
metabolomics approach gaverevealed
the
celan differentiation between the New Zealand and Korean samples, but it gaveshowed
ambiguities for the Canadian samples. We then applied
the metabolomics approach forto
the
samples from identical-species
samples
that could not be differentiated by DNA sequencinge.
ItThis
gaveyielded clean
separations of all of the
analyzed samples, and compounds specific forto
each country were also were identified.
The validity of the metabolomic approachmethod for differentiating
identical species was also demonstratedconfirmed by
correct prediction of the blind samples. In summary, Aas
the
genomicetic
approach gaveprovided
unambiguous read-outs for different species, and the metabolomics
approach gave cleanly distinguishedction
between[JH4]
identical species from different countirries,
their comgbined use
could be an especially robust approachmethod
for the identification of the
sourcesorigins even in difficult cases. We
believe the method isto be
generally applicable to many herbal medicinal
products for which various species are grown internationally.
Introduction
TheIn East
Asian countries, deer antlers have been used in oriental
countries as important meidcationmedicinal
ingredients
and dietary supplements for many[JH5] hundreds of years. In fact, Manymuch
researchers havehas
shown that the deer antlers can provide beneficial
effects
such as anti-aging [1], and
anti-inflammatory [2], as
well as blood-regenerating and blood-pressure-lowering
effects [3].
TheThese
healthysalutary
effectsresults
of
deer antlers are due to theirthe
ingredients
and many chemicals and other constituents that have
been found to be present in deer antlers: amino acids, nucleic acids,
polyamines, vitamins, and additional organic
and inorganic acids. As with any[JH6]
other natural productssubstances, thedeer
antler compositions of deer antlers vary quite a lotwidely
according to their geographical
sourcesorigins.
Moreover, the
price of deer antlersPrices
can
vary also vary, as much as tenfold.
times
depending on the sources[JH7] .
AccordinglyAlmost inevitably then, foul
plays have happened faking the sources of the antlersfraud
and illicit trade have ensued, which causinge
socioeconomic problems in antler-consumingproducing
countries and medical malpractice issues in antler-consuming
countries. As various species of deers are
cultivated in different countries, classification of the origins of deer
antlers is essential for their correct use of deer
antlerslegal marketing and correct use.
There
have been some sStudies tohave
differentiated the deers
or[JH8]
antlers using genetic[JH9] s,
metabolomics
or morphological and metabolomic approaches[JH10] . For the
genetic analysisA
phylogenetic analysis of the
antler-growing genus Cervus producing antlers, phylogenetic
analysis was performed using the entire cytochrome b gene [4], and a world deer phylogeny was constructed for the
world’s deer using sequence data from the genes of on the basis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) gene sequence data [5, 6]. With
respect to the genetic variation of deer, the cClassification of deer species according to their
genetic variation has
been conducted by karyotyping
[7],
repetitive DNA sequencing [8, 9], RFLP analysis of mtDNA [10],
and gene sequencing of mtDNA
[11].
The classification of the
dDeer was also donehave
been classified also on a morphological basis. Morphologically,[JH11] tThe
European red deer (C. elaphus), the wapiti (the C. elaphus subspecies inof Asia and North America), and the sika deer (Cervus nippon)
are monophyletic [4]. In terms of overall
morphologyThat is
to say, they
are very similar to one another, except in body size and antler morphology [4, 12, 13]. Lastly, a metabolomic approach combined with The
antlers were also classified using metabolomics combined with principal
component analysis (PCA) has been employed for classification of antlers
[14].
However, the number of samples in one group was quite small (about six[JH12] ) and the statistical approach (PCA) cannot be used for
the prediction of unknown samples[JH13] .
Although
the above approaches have owntheir respective
merits, there are drawbacks to limit
their general use: genetic[JH14] approaches cannot differentiate the antlers
from the same species; metabolomics approaches needs to be done on a
sizeable sample sizes for statistical reliability; morphological
studies lacks objective criteria; metabolomic
approaches require sizeable sample sizes for
their statistical reliability[JH15] . HereIn the present study, we employed a combined approach of genomics and metabolomics
genomic/metabolomic approach
to the determination
of
thevarious species’
origins. among various species. Metabolomically, Wwe
used aboutan approximately
five-times-larger
sample size, for one country group,
for
metabolomics approach than did athe
previous study aforementioned
[14].
AlthoughWhereas
neither
individual approach, of genomics
or metabolomics, did not
proved fully differentiate the originssatisfactory,
their combination gaveenabled a reliableaccurate
and reliable separationdifferentiation
of deer antlers origin by the
origin from among the various species. Using
the approach, we were able to predict the oOrigins
prediction of deer antlers correctly,proved
effective even for those from the
same genetic species grown infrom
different countries. TheOur method,
moreover, can be applied forto
the discrimination of not only of deer
antlers, but also, more
generally, toof
other orientalEast Asian or Oriental
medicines, such as herbs and plants.
Results and Discussion
Genetic-DNA
analysisGenomic[JH16] approach
We analyzed the DNA sequences of 101
deer antler samples collected from Canada,
New Zealand and Korea. The Individualdeer
species of the deer for all the
samples were determined for all of the samples
were determined by DNA sequencing of the base pairs in the 439
- 450 sequence region of the D-loop of the mitochondrial
DNA (Figure 1B). Out ofAmong the 40
Canadian samples, 24 were found to be C. e. nelsoni species, and 13 and
3 samples to be[JH17] C. e. manitobensis and C. e. canadensis species, respectively (Supplementary
Table S1). Out ofAmong the 30
New Zealand samples, 27 samples were C. elaphus species
(25 samples showed 100% sequence homology, and 2
samples showed 97% sequence homology),
and
the otherremaining 3
samples belonginged to C.
e. nelsoni[JH18] , C. e. macneilli (92%),
and C. e. barbarous (96%) species, respectively.
Out ofAmong
the 31 Korean samples, 10 samples belonged
to C. elaphus species, 11 samples belong to C. e. Canadensis,
and 10 samples belong to C. e. nelsoni
species. Therefore, C. e. nelsoni was
the majorpredominant Canadian
species for the Canadian samples, and was a but
only a very minor speciesone in New Zealand.
samples.
In comparisonConversely, the predominant New Zealand species, C. elaphus, species
was the majority for the New Zealand samples and was not presentfound
inamong
the Canadian samples. These two
species, C. e. nelsoni and C.
elaphus, were almost equally presentprevalent
amongin
the Korean samples. It is known that aboriginal Korean deers gotbecame
almost extinct during the 1940s, and that in response the
Korean authorities deers were imported
deer
from foreign countries. Our data show that mMany
of
these deers currently
grown in Korea had been importedcame from Canada and New Zealand,
our data showed. The data indicated also
indicate
that the DNA sequencinge (genomic)
approach cancould be used
toeffectively tellidentify
the origins of some species, (for
example, C. e. manitobensis) that is
present only in Canadian samples, or to exclude Canada as the origins forof
C. elaphus. However, it wascould not sufficient
for the differentiateion of
the countryies of
origins forfor
all of the samples, even thoughwhen
the read-out of the DNA sequence itself iswas
almost unambiguous.
NMR-based
metabolomics approach
As
the geneticgenomic
approach alone did not giveprovide enough information
sufficient
to tellreveal the
origins of allsome[JH19] of the
antler samples, we triedemployed the metabolomic
approach another approach that canto
address the environmental or growth conditions of the deer. By this approach,
specifically, Wwe
analyzed
obtained the NMR
spectra obtained forfrom
the
antler extracts and analyzed them using metabolomics approach (Figure 2). The NMR[JH20] spectra, in the 3 -
4 ppm regions, featured many signals from sugar-containing
compounds at 3 - 4 ppm regions as
well as those from methyl groups, probably from branched amino acids [17].
Although the representative spectra of each country’s the samples
from
each country were seemingly differed[JH21] nt, they could not addressresolve
the question of intra-group variation.
Therefore, we further performed thea
multivariate statistical analysis forof
the entire NMR data set. We applied a Partial
Least Squares-Discrimination Analysis (PLS-DA) to seedetermine
if the metabolic profiles cancould be
used to differentiate the origins and to find
specific signals belonging to each country group (Figure 3). The results showed
that in fact, the PLS-DA model cancould
reliably differentiate the antlers from New Zealand andfrom
Korean antlers. StillHowever,
the
Canadian samples exhibited some overlaps with the samples
from both New Zealand and Korean
samples. The quite tight clustering of the Korean samples maymight
be
due toreflect the similar growth conditions of the
deer in Koreathat country,
as
the countrywhich is much smaller than the other
two. The results also indicated that the antlers’ metabolic
profiles of the antler maymight be more affected
more
by the environmental or growth conditions
than the DNA sequences, difference[JH22] , as there was no noticeable grouping
within the Korean samples withfor the three
equally populated species. Overall, the metabolomics approach,
though
in some ways very effective, shows some utility, but is
still not sufficient tois inadequate for
differentiatinge all the samples
at once. In fact, A the
encouraging data from a previous report for the utility of theon
origin
differentiation by NMR-based metabolomics in differentiating
origins might have shown the positive data due tobeen
skewed by theirthe much
smaller sample sizes[JH23] for each country (compared withthan
ours) [14].
Combined Approach
of Genetics and Metabolomicsgenomic/metabolomic approach
As
eachboth
of the genetics and
metabolomics[JH24] approaches showed at least some utility in discriminatingon
of
theantler origins, we decidedreasoned
that
to analyze the data in a combined genomic/metabolomic
mannerstrategy tomight
effect a
significant improvement. the differentiation. First, we
applied the DNAgenomic
approach,, without
further experimental analysis, , can be used to
the
differentiatione of the species
present only in one country, for example, C. e. manitobensis
fromin
Canada, or C. e [JH25] .macneilli
(92% sequence homology),
and C. e. barbarus
(96%) fromin New Zealand. Second, we used metabolomics for the species
that
are present in large numbers in more than one country.
we
applied metabolomics. We
analyzed C. elaphus species, presentwhich
is found in both in New Zealand (25 samples) and Korean (10 samples), samples
and C. e. nelsoni species, presentwhich
is prevalent in both in Canadaian
(24 samples) and Korean (10 samples), samples,
as determined by the DNA analysis (see supplementary Table
S1). We performed a
multivariate Orthogonal pProjections to lLatent sStructure-dDiscriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) multivariate analysis on
the NMR metabolicte profile[JH26] data for each species.,
The differentiations were achieved with
one predictive
component and one orthogonal component for C. elaphus species and one predictive component
and two orthogonal components for C.
e. nelsoni species. The results showed
that the origins of each species cancould be
clearly differentiated (Figure 4A and Figure 4B). These analyses results
showOverall, the results proved
to demonstrate that categorizing the species withby
genetic[JH27] DNA sequencinge first,
firstly, andafter which then
analyzing the identical
species, therefore (i.e. those
that cannotcould not be
differentiated genetically), are
analyzed withby means of
metabolomics, s approach
can comprehensively discriminate the
origins of the antler samples.
Statistical
Vv[JH28] alidation
To eliminate theany
likelihood that the clear separations
might behave
occurred by chance, we performed statistical validation using Y-scrambling [15, 16, 18]. We randomly permutated Y
variable value for 200 rounds to rebuilt and analyze.[JH29] We observed a substantial
decrease in both R2 and Q2 parameters for each model (Supplementary
Figures S1A and S1B), for
each model, with the extrapolated value of the Q2
regression line ofbeing about -0.2
or -0.3, respectively.
Marker compound identification and verification
To getobtain thean
idea of which metabolites contributed to the
differentiation of the same species grown in different countries, we
constructed the S-plots based on the two OPLS-DA
models of each species (see
Figures 5A and 5B).
ForRegarding
the C. elaphus samples from New Zealand and Korea, the signals
at 2.6537 and 0.9804 ppm were higher in the New Zealand onescases,
whereas the 1.3237 ppm signal was higher in the Korean
samples. Based on thea comparison
with the standard samples and a two-dimensional spectral analysis
(HMBC, DQF-COSY, TOCSY, HSQC) [17], we identified those signals
as coming from methionine, valine and lactate, respectively. The Oother
signals from the identified compounds also were also confirmed,
by the
NMR analysis (data not shown). To further test for the actual biased
presence of the marker metabolites, we built a
plotted with the
intensities of thosetheir
signals in the New Zealand, Canadian and Korean samples using an independent
Student’s-t test[JH30] (Figure 6). The result confirmeds
that these metabolites arewere
significantly biased in one of the groups, contributing to the separation.
ForAs concerns
the identified marker compounds, it iswas
interesting to see that the same aliphatic amino acids, methionine and valine, arewere
higher in both the New Zealand and Canadian samples
than in the Korean samples, regardless of the species.
In
addition, mMaleate and lactate, common organic
acids, arewere higher
in the
Korean samples than those fromin the other
two countries’. We recently reported that
feeding conditions can affect the metabolites detected in deer antlers.[JH31] It is likely therefore that
the differential metabolicte profiles
of single-species
deer antlers from a single species raised infrom deer
living
in different countries are fromreflect
the growth, food, and environmental differences in thethose
respective
countries. Moreover, our results confirmed that
identical species can be differentiated based on their
metabolicte profiles.
Prediction
of the
origins for a single species
An important practical matterconsideration
of
thein differentiatingon of
the origins of natural products, including deer antlers, is ifwhether
a given
method can be used to predict unknown samples
correctly. As our genomic (DNA) test cancould
deliver unambiguous species differentiation, we tested if our
metabolomics model to see if it cancould
predict the origins of the unknown samples from a single
species. The process can be performed by leaving some data
(test set) out and rebuilding a new OPLS-DA model using the remaining data set.[JH32] In this case, the test
set can be considered unknown samples for prediction.[JH33] We randomly took
outremoved as many as 30% of the samples
from the entire dataset (test set), and carried out the prediction test with thethis
obtained OPLS-DA
model, so obtained. Specifically, Wwe took outremoved
a total of 11 samples (8 New Zealand and 3 Korean samples) forrepresenting
the C. elaphus species, and alsoalong
with 11 samples (8 Canadian and 3 Korean samples) forrepresenting
the C. e . nelsoni
species. for the prediction tests. As shown in
Figures 7A and 7B, all 11 of the test
samples (8 New Zealand and 3 Korea samples) of the C. elaphus
speciessamples and all 11 test samples (8 Canadian and 3 Korean samples) of
the C. e. nelsoni speciessamples were predicted correctly withusing
an
a priori cut-off value of 0.5, whichthereby
confirmings the
robustness of the metabolomics antler differentiation model for the
same species. samples.
Significance
and cC[JH34] onclusions
Natural and agricultural products, including herbalanimal
and animalherbal productsvarieties,
are
important economical commodities for all countries, and used very
widely as foods orand
dietary supplements, are important economic
commodities in all countries.
At
the same time, tThe values of thosethese
materialscommodities
vary significantly depending onaccording to
their origins. Therefore, correct indicationdetermination
of the
countries of origins is important not only for the properaccurate
appreciation
of the economic valuationes, but also
for the quality control. of the
materials[JH35] . For thoseproducts
obtained from species that are differentially present in
different countries, the[JH36] DNA sequencinggenomic[JH37] approach can provide a very reliable means of differentiationidentification.
However, itthis approach
cannot be applied to all the cases, because
identicaldifferentiation of identical species
are
grown infrom
different countries. MoreoverThis limitation is a
particularly important one, in that seeds
for herbal products are traded internationally more often and widely than
ever
before, and therefore, there are
good chancesincreasing the likelihood of onethe
same species being presentgrown in differentvarious
countries. Indeed, Ssome
herbal species purposefully are intentionally grown
in differentother-than-native
countries where cultivation costs are muchsignificantly
lower. IIn these
cases, though, thediffering
cultivation techniques and environmental conditions lead almost inevitably to a
wide range of product qualitiesy.
of
the products may well differ due to the
growth and environmental conditions. As we showed here, the metabolomics
approach can help differentiate the origins forunder
thesethose
difficult casescircumstances.
Although metabolomicswith this
approach alone, could not differentiate not all
of
the three origins for all of the deer
antler samples could be differentiated[JH38] , it was able to reliably
effective
in differentiatinge those
samples from identical-species samples
from different countries. SoThus
far, many metabolomics literaturestudies,
including ours, have reported the origin differentiation
of
origins usingby means of either NMR or Mmass
spectroscopic methods [15, 18-22]. StillContrastingly,
we
hardly see examplesexamples of single-species
origin discrimination for the samples that are
confirmed to be a single species by DNA sequencing are hardly
seen in the literature. We suggest that the combined genomic/metabolomic
approach using genetics and metabolomics can
improve the reliability of the differentiation of the origins of natural
products origin differentiation.
[JH1]implicit
[JH2]implicit
[JH3]This should be identified, here, and once in the main text (on first mention), unless the long form is almost never used in your field.
[JH5]Delete this if you prefer.
[JH6]OR: most
[JH7]Implicit
[JH8]OR (if any study has differentiated both deer and antlers): and/or
[JH9]*Perhaps the more general “genetic” is better here. (“genomic” is a more specific category of “genetic”)
[JH10]… to match the order followed below
[JH11]implicit
[JH12]It would be better if you could get the precise number.
[JH13]??—couldn’t understand this or how it connects to first part of sentence. As always, feel free to send me an e-mail with additional context/explanation or a rewritten sentence, and I will check the sentence again, at no additional charge.
[JH14]… probably the more general form is better here too (but otherwise, substitute “genomic”)
[JH15]… to match the order followed above
[JH16]It’s probably ok to retain "DNA analysis" if you prefer, but I think that "Genomic" is better for consistency (especially because this is a heading).
[JH17]Can omit in this syntax
[JH18](?) Shouldn’t there be a sequence homology percentage shown for this one as well?
[JH19]*OR: any
[JH20]implicit
[JH22]implicit
[JH23]OR: size
[JH24]Implicit here
[JH25]Inserted spaces
[JH26]If this really should be “metabolite profile,” make the change here and passim….
[JH27]Redundant given “DNA”
[JH28]… just for consistency
[JH29]??—couldn’t understand
[JH30](?) OR: Is it “Student’s t-test” -?
[JH31]Footnote for this?
[JH32]This is covered adequately below.
[JH33]repetitive
[JH34]Retain your original version if it is part of an overall template used by your target journal.
[JH35]implicit
[JH36]change to “a” if more than one such approach
[JH37]Use “DNA sequencing” if you prefer, though I think that “genomic” is better, simply because this is the first mention of this method in the Conclusions.