First, Some Project Background
In order to get some background and understanding of the hematodinium work done in the Roberts lab, I chatted with Grace Crandall via Zoom for an hour or so.
As background, Grace is a member of the Roberts lab who just graduated. She’s been investigating how infected and uninfected Tanner crab respond to various temperature regimes by collecting and analyzing transcriptomes. Here’s a (very very) rough outline of the experimental protocol, which was conducted in partnership with Pam Jensen at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G):
-
400 male Tanner crab were collected from Stephen’s Passage, near Juneau AK, and brought back to the ADF&G lab in Juneau
-
All were tested for hematodinium infection via cPCR, 180 were selected for temperature treatments (90 infected, 90 uninfected)
-
Crabs were divided into 9 tanks, with 10 infected and 10 uninfected in each
-
Tanks were at 3 different temperatures - 4°C (cool), 7.5°C (ambient), and 10°C (elevated)
-
Hemolymph samples were taken 3 times - initial sample, Day 2, and Day 17, with Day 0 being the start of the differential temp treatments
-
RNA was extracted from hemolymph samples
-
Gene expression differences over time and between treatments were analyzed
Notes on Conversation with Grace
The following notes are in no particular order
-
Grant money for project was released in fall 2017
-
Collections targeted immatures. Since crabs are more prone to infection while molting, and Tanner crabs have a terminal molt, immature crabs have a higher chance of having BCS
-
There’s a new version of the maturity ratio (chela height vs carapace width, used to determine maturity in Tanner crab) that’s specific to SE Alaska
-
Crabs were left in tanks for ~9 days to acclimate
-
Crabs weren’t fed for two reasons. First, it would’ve been an extra variable to manage. Second, because water quality was an issue
-
Prevalence of hematodinium in Kodiak/Cook Inlet (interested me because it’s between the high-infection areas of SE Alaska and the low-infection-rate Bering Sea): Grace isn’t sure, will send over papers
-
All tanks had header tanks that were fed into main tanks for temperature treatment. No water mixing between tanks
-
Some initially-uninfected crabs had extremely low infection levels at end of experiment. Likely because cPCR was used initially, qPCR was used at the end
-
There’s a ton of good qPCR data that’s largely unused - that’ll be great for looking at the hematodinium side of things. How much hemat is present in which crabs? What temp treatment were they?
-
No hemolymph samples were taken from dead crab
-
Heater likely broke during 9-day acclimation period, but doesn’t remember exactly
-
Several samples were taken from each crab at Day 17 as a safety net. 3 samples each from cold and ambient crab, 6 each from warm crab (since 95% of warm-treatment crab died by Day 10)
-
There are still a ton of hemolymph samples in the -80 freezer
-
Hematodinium/crab comparisons done with MEGAN (which assigns phylogenetic stuff to sequence data) and Busco. Steps on github wiki
-
Sequenced the crabs that fit with libraries we wanted. As am example: wanted pool of samples with Day 2 uninfected crabs. Picked ones that matched it with good RNA yields
-
Morado and Jeff Fields have a lot of good hematodinium research
-
Manifestations of hematodinium infection differ some between hosts. BCD might be unique for its bitter taste
-
Samples in the -80 freezer don’t have RNALater anymore - they were pelleted and the supernatant was extracted
-
In Grace’s paper draft, Supplemental I is all samples, Supplemental II is libraries
-
Later, figured how to do differential gene expression using package DESeq2
-
Certain stages of hematodinium may be more infectious than others. Dinospore may be more infectious
-
Libraries were limited by time, since so much time was spent figuring out extraction protocol
Biggest Obstacles
-
The biggest problem was finding a good method of RNA extraction that wouldn’t result in degraded or impure RNA. This problem took a year to solve! Eventually Pam Jensen found a method that worked.
-
GeneWiz was used for sequencing, since they could sequence smaller amounts of RNA and were much quicker
-
The large die-off (95% of warm-treatment crabs dying by Day 10) limited what could be analyzed
-
The NW Genomic Center (UW facility in Figgy Hall) took over 6 months to sequence samples
-
Since crab hemolymph is clear for uninfected crabs, it was sometimes difficult to determine whether you were getting seawater or hemolymph
-
When trying to pellet samples, was getting more of a slush. This might have been why the RNA wasn’t extracting well. After switching to a hemolymph extraction protocol, this was largely resolved
Next Steps
-
Looking at hematodinium. Have only looked at host response to temperature. What does hematodinium do inside host? Is it impacted by temperature?
-
Hemolymph was placed in RNALater, spun down, supernatant was pulled off and kept. Might be something to be extracted in there
-
Getting more of a time series. Won’t be super robust for warm treatment. Already partially done, but a more statistic-focused approach (on either crab or hematodinium) would be great