Evidence that the Bowman-Birk inhibitor from Pisum sativum affects intestinal proteolytic activities in chickens.
chicken
digestion
inhibitor
pea
protease
Journal
Poultry science
ISSN: 1525-3171
Titre abrégé: Poult Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0401150
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Oct 2023
11 Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
09
08
2023
revised:
28
09
2023
accepted:
06
10
2023
medline:
7
11
2023
pubmed:
7
11
2023
entrez:
6
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Chicken diet essentially relies on soybean as the major source of proteins but there are increasing efforts to identify other protein-rich feedstuffs. Of these, some pea cultivars constitute interesting sources of proteins, although some of them contain antinutritional factors that may compromise the digestibility of their protein content. Consequently, chickens exhibit low performance, while undigested compounds rejected in feces have a negative environmental impact. In this article, we analyzed the intestinal content of chickens fed a pea diet (Pisum sativum) to decipher the mechanisms that could explain such a low digestibility. Using gelatin zymography, we observed that the contents of chicken fed the pea diet exhibit altered proteolytic activities compared with intestinal contents from chickens fed a rapeseed, corn, or soybean diet. This pea-specific profile parallels the presence of a 34 kDa protein band that resists proteolysis during the digestion process. Using mass spectrometry analysis, we demonstrated that this band contains the pea-derived Bowman-Birk protease inhibitor (BBI) and 3 chicken proteases, the well-known chymotrypsinogen 2-like (CTRB2) and trypsin II-P39 (PRSS2), and the yet uncharacterized trypsin I-P38 (PRSS3). All 3 proteases are assumed to be protease targets of BBI. Molecular modeling of the interaction of pea BBI with PRSS2 and PRSS3 trypsins reveals that electrostatic features of PRSS3 may favor the formation of a BBI-PRSS3 complex at physiological pH. We hypothesize that PRSS3 is specifically expressed and secreted in the intestinal lumen to form a complex with BBI, thereby limiting its inhibitory effects on PRSS2 and chymotrypsinogen 2-like proteases. These data clearly demonstrate that in chickens, feedstuff containing active pea BBI affects intestinal proteolytic activities. Further studies on the effects of BBI on the expression of PRSS3 by digestive segments will be useful to better appreciate the impact of pea on intestine physiology and function. From these results, we suggest that PRSS3 protease may represent an interesting biomarker of digestive disorders in chickens, similar to human PRSS3 that has been associated with gut pathologies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37931399
pii: S0032-5791(23)00701-0
doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2023.103182
pmc: PMC10654233
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
103182Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Poult Sci. 2023 Jan;102(1):102293
pubmed: 36442308
Curr Protein Pept Sci. 2006 Jun;7(3):201-16
pubmed: 16787260
Ann Nutr Metab. 1995;39(3):164-76
pubmed: 7486843
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Aug 28;98(18):10037-41
pubmed: 11517324
Int J Pept Protein Res. 1985 Feb;25(2):113-31
pubmed: 3886572
Br Poult Sci. 1989 Mar;30(1):81-9
pubmed: 2787194
Arch Latinoam Nutr. 1996 Dec;44(4 Suppl 1):26S-30S
pubmed: 9137635
J Biol Chem. 2015 Aug 28;290(35):21523-35
pubmed: 26175157
Poult Sci. 2017 Jul 1;96(7):2064-2073
pubmed: 28339726
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 24;15(9):e0239156
pubmed: 32970742
J Proteome Res. 2007 Apr;6(4):1418-25
pubmed: 17367184
J Agric Food Chem. 2000 Jun;48(6):2286-90
pubmed: 10888538
Mol Cell Proteomics. 2014 Feb;13(2):397-406
pubmed: 24309898
Animals (Basel). 2022 Dec 28;13(1):
pubmed: 36611728
PLoS One. 2015 Aug 12;10(8):e0134634
pubmed: 26267859
Protein Sci. 2012 Aug;21(8):1103-12
pubmed: 22610453
Br Poult Sci. 2003 Jul;44(3):427-37
pubmed: 12964627
J Econ Entomol. 2000 Jun;93(3):892-6
pubmed: 10902346
J Biol Chem. 2008 Feb 15;283(7):4115-23
pubmed: 18077447
Electrophoresis. 1997 Dec;18(15):2714-23
pubmed: 9504803
J Agric Food Chem. 2003 Apr 9;51(8):2415-20
pubmed: 12670190
J Surg Oncol. 2019 Jun;119(8):1108-1121
pubmed: 30908656
Poult Sci. 2023 Apr;102(4):102503
pubmed: 36739802
J Biol Chem. 2020 Mar 13;295(11):3447-3455
pubmed: 32014997
J Mol Biol. 1999 Jan 22;285(3):1195-207
pubmed: 9887273
Poult Sci. 2017 Jun 1;96(6):1735-1747
pubmed: 28339732
Gastroenterology. 1984 Apr;86(4):681-92
pubmed: 6698368
J Agric Food Chem. 2008 Aug 13;56(15):6294-303
pubmed: 18620399
J Plant Physiol. 2013 Nov 1;170(16):1455-60
pubmed: 23769496
Plant Physiol. 2003 Oct;133(2):560-70
pubmed: 12972663
J Nutr. 1991 Apr;121(4):532-8
pubmed: 2007905
J Biol Chem. 2003 Dec 5;278(49):48580-9
pubmed: 14507909
Arch Anim Nutr. 2016 Oct;70(5):364-77
pubmed: 27434309
Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2021 Sep 1;29(8):564-569
pubmed: 33758142
Plant Physiol Biochem. 2012 Mar;52:77-82
pubmed: 22305069
Gut. 2017 Oct;66(10):1767-1778
pubmed: 28096305
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Apr;27(1):103-12
pubmed: 12679075
Poult Sci. 1996 Oct;75(10):1243-52
pubmed: 8893301
Br Poult Sci. 2020 Jun;61(3):287-293
pubmed: 31951479
Br Poult Sci. 1987 Jun;28(2):219-29
pubmed: 3607549
FEBS Lett. 1995 Feb 20;360(1):15-20
pubmed: 7875292
Nucleic Acids Res. 2018 Jul 2;46(W1):W296-W303
pubmed: 29788355
J Mol Biol. 2002 Feb 1;315(5):1209-18
pubmed: 11827488
Poult Sci. 2019 Feb 1;98(2):803-810
pubmed: 30321430
Plant Physiol Biochem. 2020 Apr;149:286-293
pubmed: 32097847
Biol Res. 1995;28(4):239-49
pubmed: 9251755
Animals (Basel). 2020 Nov 12;10(11):
pubmed: 33198118
J Nutr. 1996 Mar;126(3):634-42
pubmed: 8598548
J Plant Physiol. 2013 Jan 15;170(2):225-9
pubmed: 23084322
Arch Insect Biochem Physiol. 2020 Jan;103(1):e21637
pubmed: 31625209
J Nutr. 1988 Apr;118(4):521-5
pubmed: 3282043