Premium
Transcriptome comparison in the pituitary–adrenal axis between Beagle and Chinese Field dogs after chronic stress exposure
Author(s) -
Luo Wei,
Fang Meixia,
Xu Haiping,
Xing Huijie,
Nie Qinghua
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
animal genetics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.756
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1365-2052
pISSN - 0268-9146
DOI - 10.1111/age.12325
Subject(s) - beagle , medicine , adrenal cortex , endocrinology , biology , hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis , prefrontal cortex , neuroscience , hormone , cognition
Summary Chronic stress can induce a series of maladjustments, and the response to stress is partly regulated by the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis. The aim of this study was to investigate the genetic mechanisms of this axis regulating stress responsiveness. The pituitary and adrenal cortex of Beagle and Chinese Field Dog ( CFD ) from a stress exposure group [including Beagle pituitary 1 ( BP 1), CFD pituitary 1 ( CFDP 1), Beagle adrenal cortex 1 ( BAC 1), CFD adrenal cortex 1 ( CFDAC 1)] and a control group [including Beagle pituitary 2 ( BP 2), CFD pituitary 2 ( CFDP 2), Beagle adrenal cortex 2 ( BAC 2), CFD adrenal cortex 2 ( CFDAC 2)], selected to perform RNA ‐seq transcriptome comparisons, showed that 40, 346, 376, 69, 70, 38, 57 and 71 differentially expressed genes were detected in BP 1 vs. BP 2, CFDP 1 vs. CFDP 2, BP 1 vs. CFDP 1, BP 2 vs. CFDP 2, BAC 1 vs. BAC 2, CFDAC 1 vs. CFDAC 2, BAC 1 vs. CFDAC 1 and BAC 2 vs. CFDAC 2 respectively. NPB was a gene common to BAC 1 vs. BAC 2 and CFDAC 1 vs. CFDAC 2, indicating it was a potential gene affecting response to chronic stress, regardless of the extent of chronic stress induced. PLP 1 was a gene common to BP 1 vs. CFDP 1 and BP 2 vs. CFDP 2, suggesting its important roles in affecting the stress‐tolerance difference between the two breeds, regardless of whether there was stress exposure or not. Pathway analysis found 12, 4, 11 and 1 enriched pathway in the comparisons of BP 1 vs. CFDP 1, BP 2 vs. CFDP 2, CFDP 1 vs. CFDP 2 and BAC 1 vs. BAC 2 respectively. Glutamatergic synapse, neuroactive ligand–receptor interaction, retrograde endocannabinoid signaling, GABA ergic synapse, calcium signaling pathway and dopaminergic synapse were the most significantly enriched pathways in both CFDP 1 vs. CFDP 2 and BP 1 vs. CFDP 1. GO , KEGG pathway and gene network analysis demonstrated that GRIA 3 , GRIN 2A , GRIN 2B and NPY were important in regulating the stress response in CFD . Nevertheless, ADORA 1 , CAMK 2A , GRM 1 , GRM 7 and NR 4A1 might be critical genes contributing to the stress‐tolerance difference between CFD and Beagle when subjected to stress exposure. In addition, RGS 4 and SYN 1 might play important roles both in regulating the stress response in CFD and in affecting the stress‐tolerance difference in different breeds. These observations clearly showed that some genes in the adrenal cortex and pituitary could regulate the stress response in Beagle and CFD s, whereas some others could affect the stress‐tolerance difference between these two breeds. Our results can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the genetic mechanisms of response to chronic stress.