Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2020 Sep 3;15(9):e0238631. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238631

The EDN2 rs110287192 gene polymorphism is associated with paratuberculosis susceptibility in multibreed cattle population

Mehmet Ulaş Çınar 1,2,*, Bilal Akyüz 3, Korhan Arslan 3, Stephen N White 2,4,5, Holly L Neibergs 5,6, Kadir Semih Gümüşsoy 7
Editor: Jasim Muhammad Uddin8
PMCID: PMC7470282  PMID: 32881967

Abstract

Paratuberculosis (pTB), also known as Johne's disease (JD), is a contagious, chronic, and granulomatous inflammatory disease of the intestines of ruminants which is caused by Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (MAP) infection, resulting in billions of dollars in economic losses worldwide. Since, currently, no effective cure is available for MAP infection, it is important to explore the genetic variants that affect the host MAP susceptibility. The aim of this study was to analyze a potential association between EDN2 synonymous gene mutations (rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs136707411), that modifies susceptibility to pTB. EDN2 rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs136707411 mutations were genotyped in 68 infected and 753 healthy animals from East Anatolian Red crossbred, Anatolian Black crossbred and Holstein breed cattle by using Custom TaqMan SNP Genotyping Assays. For pTB status, serum antibody levels S/P ≥ 1.0 were assessed in carriers of the different EDN2 genotypes. EDN2 rs110287192 mutation showed a significant association with bovine pTB (adj. p < 0.05). For rs110287192 locus, the odd ratios for GG and TG genotypes versus TT genotypes were 1.73; (95% CI = 0.34–8.59) and 0.53 (95% CI = 0.12–2.37) respectively, which indicated that proportion of TG heterozygotes were significantly higher in control animals as compared to pTB animals. On the other hand, while rs136707411 mutation showed a suggestive association with pTB status in the examined cattle population (nominal p < 0.05); no association was detected between rs109651404 genotypes and pTB status. Selecting animals against rs110287192-GG genotype may decrease the risk of pTB in cattle of the Bos taurus taurus subspecies.

Introduction

Paratuberculosis (pTB), or Johne’s Disease, is a chronic disease affecting ruminant livestock, and is caused by intestinal infection with Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (MAP) [1]. MAP is a Gram-positive intracellular pathogen which is dependent on mycobactin, and thus unable to replicate in the environment [2]. MAP’s ability to infect other animals through indirect contact is facilitated by prolonged survival times. For instance, MAP remained viable and was transmitted for up to 55 weeks in a shaded, outdoor area in Australia Whittington et al. [3]. Animals are usually MAP infected at a young age and are generally believed to undergo an extended latent period of chronic infection [4]. pTB begins as a localized infection that may become systemic and often results in chronic granulomatous enteritis leading eventually to weight loss, (diarrhea in some species) and death [1]. Therefore, pTB causes considerable economic losses to livestock farmers, particularly in dairy cows and beef cattle. A recent study estimated annual cost caused by pTB in the United States to be $20.80 per dairy cow [5] and this value may estimate at up to $72.5 per cow per year in Netherlands [6]. Although, data to estimate losses from pTB in beef herds are limited, Bhattarai et al. [7] reported an annual average loss of $276 (95% CR: $149–$478) per infected beef cattle based on survey responses. Beside direct losses as described above, indirect losses due to national and international trade restrictions and public health concerns may arise. Controversy remains as to the causation between Crohn’s disease (CD) in humans and exposure to pTB, although some experiments have already shown that there is a link between pTB and CD in humans [8,9]. Despite the application of several control strategies, such as testing, vaccination and culling to reduce pTB transmission between herds, many countries continue to face challenges in controlling pTB [1]. Therefore, understanding the genetic basis of pTB susceptibility could be an alternative method for reducing the disease and selecting cattle for enhanced resistance against pTB [10,11].

Endothelins (EDN), with three isoforms of 21-residue peptides (EDN1, EDN2, EDN3), two G-protein coupled receptors (ETA and ETB), and two endothelin-converting enzymes (ECE-1 and ECE-2), are vasoconstrictor peptides [12]. The EDN are involved in the regulation of many physiological processes, such as cardiovascular development and function, craniofacial development, blood pressure regulation, renal water and sodium excretion, neurotransmission, ovulation, and proliferation, migration and differentiation of cranial, cardiac, trunk, sacral and neural crest cells [12,13]. Among EDN genes, EDN2 has been studied in terms of ovarian research especially due to its roles in steroidogenesis and corpus luteum formation in human, model organisms and in livestock [14]. Takizawa et al. [15] investigated the EDN2 expression in mice and revealed that EDN2 mRNA was abundant in epithelial cells of the mucosal layer in the intestinal tract which may be associated with modulation of the mucosal defense by triggering immune cells. In livestock, EDN2 has been investigated for its corpus luteum formation in cattle [16] and mRNA expression profiling in chicken tissues [17]. In addition, Settles et al. [18] and Neibergs et al. [19] reported EDN2 as a strong functional and positional candidate gene for pTB susceptibility in Holstein cattle according to GWAS study. EDN2 locus was identified with genome-wide significant level of association to the presence of MAP in tissue and both tissue and feces, respectively [18]. Three EDN2 synonymous mutations on bovine chromosome 3 (BTA3), named rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs109490418 were patented for being associated with pTB susceptibility in Holstein breed cattle [20].

This study aimed to examine the association between EDN2 SNPs rs110287192, rs109651404, rs109490418 and pTB susceptibility in a Holstein population reared in Turkey and in Turkish indigenous cattle crossbreds (East Anatolian Red Cattle and Native Black Cattle). Genotyping experiments for three EDN2 SNPs were conducted and the relationship with pTB susceptibility in three cattle populations was evaluated.

Materials and methods

Sample collection

We undertook this case-control study between June 2014 and August 2014. All experimental procedures were performed in accordance with the guidelines of the Local Ethics Committee for Animal Experiments at Erciyes University (#14/77-09.04.2014). All samples were received for confirmation of a clinical suspicion of pTB in the herd and had no further follow up. Cattle were classified as infected (cases) if they were positive for blood serum enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Animals that were both clinically negative and serologically negative were considered healthy (controls). Further details regarding sample collection and ELISA diagnostic tests have been published elsewhere [21]. The study population was found to consist of 68 infected and 750 healthy animals. Briefly, blood samples were collected from cattle at two to three years of age including East Anatolian Red crossbred (n = 288), Anatolian Black crossbred (n = 112) and Holstein (n = 418) breeds from the Kayseri province and its vicinity in Turkey. Animals included in the present study were housed in similar environmental conditions and not vaccinated for pTB. Blood samples were used for the isolation of genomic DNA for genotyping, and serum samples were used for detection of MAP antibodies by ELISA.

SNP selection

Three SNP selection methods were followed in the present study. First, we obtained genotype data of U.S. Holsteins from the existing literature on the association of EDN2 gene polymorphisms with MAP tissue infection and pTB susceptibility [19]. Second, rs110287192–g.104700352T>G in 5′ UTR variant, rs109651404–g.104689861G>A intergenic variant and rs109490418–g.104706758G>A in 3′ UTR variant mutations were patented by Neibergs et al. patent# US20140283151 [20] for selective breeding to produce offspring having at least one of susceptibility, resistance or tolerance to pTB. Third, since assay design for the patented rs109490418 mutation failed due to too many variants in the immediate vicinity, another mutation which is linked (D' = 0.88, r2 = 0.28) and 6166 bp downstream rs136707411–g.104700592G>A in 5′ UTR variant region was selected for genotyping. The susceptible alleles for rs11028192 and rs109651404 were previously reported as G and A, respectively [19].

Genotyping

Genomic DNA was extracted from whole blood using a standard phenol–chloroform extraction procedure. DNA concentration of the samples were quantified by Nano Drop (NanoDrop, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), diluted to 50 ng/μl and stored at −20°C until used. rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs136707411 SNPs of EDN2 were genotyped using the TaqMan allelic discrimination method, which determines variants of single nucleic acid sequence. Since current SNPs have not been genotyped by using any other method, the custom TaqMan chemistry was selected as cost and time effective genotyping method. Using two primer/probe pairs in each reaction allows genotyping of the two possible variants at the single nucleotide polymorphism in a target template sequence. Details of assay IDs, primer and probe sequences were given in the Table in S1 Table. The genotyping PCR reaction was performed by adding 2 μl of genomic DNA template, 5 μl of genotyping master mix (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), 0.5 μl of the genotyping custom-made assay mix (probes and primers) (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and 2.5 μl of DNAase-free water. Two negative controls were included on each plate. For the negative controls, 2.5 μl of DNAase-free water was added to each reaction plate instead of genomic DNA for the sample. The cycling parameters were as follows: first, denaturation was done at 95°C for 10 min, followed by 40 cycles of denaturation at 95°C for 15 s, annealing and extension at 60°C for 60 s. The PCR was performed in a StepOne Real-Time PCR System (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA).

Statistical analysis

An online software (http://www.husdyr.kvl.dk/htm/kc/popgen/genetik/applets/kitest.htm) was used to analyze the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) and allele frequency for each SNP and statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Data were analyzed using SAS 9.2 software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Additive genetic model was used for statistical analysis. The univariable analysis for logistic regression considered the infection status as a categorical response variable (yes/no), and SNPs (all three SNPs have three genotypes, therefore respective loci have three levels), breed (three groups i.e. two indigenous crossbred and Holstein) and sex (male and female) were included as possible explanatory variables. Genotypes were considered as ordinal variables and as class variables with the major homozygous genotype deemed as baseline. Data were analyzed using PROC LOGISTIC procedure and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidential intervals (CIs) were calculated. Bonferroni correction (based on the total number of markers tested) was used for multiple comparisons correction, and statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 818 animals met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study to be genotyped, of which 68 had a diagnosis of pTB according to ELISA OD values (≥1.0) were subjected to association analysis and were compared to 750 age-matched healthy controls. The genotyping success rates were 97%, 94% and 90% for rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs136707411, respectively and the consensus rate (on the basis of 5% duplicates) was 100% for DNA isolated from whole blood. Although, the genotype frequencies of rs1096514042 = 0.0042 for case and χ2 = 1.07 for control) and rs136707411 (χ2 = 0.02 for case and χ2 = 2.98 for control) SNPs were in accordance with the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium in the both control group and case, genotype frequencies of rs110287192 SNP was significantly deviated from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (χ2 = 35.17 for case and χ2 = 36.31 for control) due to a deficit of homozygous genotypes (TT) of the most frequent allele. The distribution of the bovine EDN2 rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs136707411 genotypes and allele frequencies in the study population are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Genotype and allele distribution of the selected SNPs in animals with pTB and controls.

SNP Genotypes (%) Allele (%) χ2 (α = 0.05, df = 1)
rs110287192 n = 796 TT TG GG T** G 55.31*
54 (6.78) 463 (58.17) 279 (35.05) 510 (64) 287 (36)
rs109651404 n = 769 GG GA AA G** A 0.97
323 (42) 341 (44.3) 105 (13.7) 500 (65) 269 (35)
rs136707411 n = 751 AA GA GG A G 4.66
291 (38.7) 330 (43.9) 130 (17.4) 450 (60) 301 (40)

* p ≤ 0.05 indicates statistical significance

** Favorable allele in previous studies

Genotypic association analysis of all three EDN2 polymorphisms with pTB are shown in Table 2. A significant association with the pTB was found for the EDN2 rs110287192 variant (Table 2). When the TT genotype was used as a reference, while genotype GG alone (OR = 1.73; 95% CI = 0.34–8.59; adj. p < 0.05) were significantly associated with a higher risk of pTB, genotype TG was associated with lower risk of pTB (OR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.12–2.37; adj. p < 0.05) (Table 2). This association remained significant after Bonferroni correction for multiple tests (Bonferroni-corrected significance level for three SNPs is 0.05/3 = 0.016).

Table 2. Univariate logistic regression analysis of studied bovine EDN2 variants and independent factors associated with pTB cases and controls.

SNP Genotype Phenotype frequency Nominal p-value Adjusted p-valuea Fixed factors OR (95% CI)
Case (%) Control (%) Sex Breed
rs110287192 TT 2 (3.70) 52 (96.3) 0.013 NS * 1.00
TG 58 (12.53) 405 (87.47) * 0.53 (0.12–2.37)
GG 8 (2.87) 271 (97.13) 1.73 (0.34–8.59)
rs109651404 GG 31 (9.6) 292 (90.4) 0.99 NS ** 1.00
GA 30 (2.33) 311 (91.2) NS 0.98 (0.32–2.97)
AA 7 (6.67) 98 (93.33) 0.76 (0.18–3.16)
rs136707411 GG 25 (19.23) 105 (80.77) 0.023 NS ** 1.00
GA 32 (9.42) 298 (90.58) NS 1.66 (0.92–2.98)
AA 11 (3.78) 280 (96.22) 2.94 (1.34–6.46)

Abbreviations: OR: odds ratio; 95% CI: 95% confidence interval

* p ≤ 0.05 indicates statistical significance

** p ≤ 0.01 indicates statistical significance

ap- value was adjusted by Bonferroni correction; NS: not significant p > 0.05

In addition, we observed suggestive association between the EDN2 rs136707411 and increased pTB risk (nominal p = 0.023; Table 2). The association did not remain significant after Bonferroni correction for multiple tests (Table 2). At the EDN2 rs136707411 locus, the OR of GA genotype versus GG genotype was 1.66 (95% CI = 0.92–2.98; nominal p < 0.05) and AA genotype versus GG genotype was 2.94 (95% CI = 1.34–6.46; nominal p < 0.05) which revealed that genotypes GA and AA increases the risk of pTB compared to genotype GG (Table 2). No genotype of EDN2 rs109651404 were found to be significant associated with pTB (all p > 0.05).

Discussion

Paratuberculosis (Johne’s disease) causes a chronic diarrhea characterized by a malabsorption syndrome. The lack of absorption of nutrients in the gastrointestinal tract leads to malnutrition, muscular wasting and eventually death which results in significant economic impact worldwide [22]. Crohn’s disease, a granulomatous enteritis in humans that can persist for decades, has clinical similarities with pTB in ruminants. Due to the clinical similarities between pTB and Crohn's disease, the role of MAP in Crohn's disease has been of interest [8]. Approximately 1.4 million people in North American are affected with Crohn’s disease [9] and its prevalence is rapidly increasing incidence worldwide, especially in newly industrialized countries, making Crohn’s as a global disease [23].

Therefore, eradication of pTB might be vital both for ruminant and public health. Control strategies to eradicate pTB mainly depend on: a) management strategies based on avoiding contact of susceptible young stock with infected animals, and b) testing animals with ELISA and culling infectious animals in herds [24]. Although management and testing strategies were powerful in reducing the infection, due to low specificity of ELISA tests and lack of effective vaccine, eradication of pTB has been shown to be difficult [24]. Thus, additional approaches, such as genomic selection for cattle less susceptible to pTB to control pTB, are needed. Similar to our results, variability among cattle breeds in their susceptibility to pTB were identified in different experiments and support that selection for enhanced resistance to the disease is possible [21,2527].

Association of bovine pTB susceptibility with EDN2 was first identified with a GWAS [18] and SNP-based gene-set enrichment analysis for MAP infection detected via tissue infection or fecal shedding by using in 245 US Holsteins [19]. In a subsequent study, the EDN2 variants rs109651404, rs110287192 and rs109490418 mutations were patented for being candidate SNPs for selection of cattle that were less susceptible to MAP infection in Holstein cows [20]. In the present experiment, rs110287192 SNP was validated as significantly associated with pTB susceptibility in a larger cattle population that consisted of Holstein and Turkish indigenous cattle crossbreds (Table 2). For the rs110287192 locus, the OR for TG genotypes versus TT genotypes was 0.53 (0.12–2.37; 95% CI) which revealed that the relative proportion TG genotypes was significantly higher in the control population than in the case population. It indicated that the TG genotype at the rs110287192 locus was associated with decreased relative risk of bovine pTB and consequently selection in favor of the TG genotype or the T allele may reduce risk of pTB in cattle (Table 2). Due to the relatedness of mycobacterial pathogens such as MAP, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium bovis, loci that provide less genetic susceptibility to one pathogen might afford some protection to the other organism. In fact, loci on BTA3 where we identified association for pTB susceptibility in the current study, overlapped with loci previously reported in the literature that were associated with bovine tuberculosis susceptibility [28] and bovine respiratory disease susceptibility [29].

The literature is rather sparse for identifying an association between EDN2 variants with production or immune traits in livestock species. In cattle, pig, and laboratory animals, EDN2 acts in the regulation of steroid production of granulosa cells [14] and EDN2 mRNA expression found to be responsible for corpus luteum formation and ovulation [16,30,31]. Although EDN2 was not found to be directly associated with immune traits, knockout mice for endothelin receptor B (EDNRB) which is a G-protein-coupled receptor of EDN2, developed Hirschsprung’s disease (HSCR) [32]. This disease is characterized by a lack of ganglion cells of the colon and exhibits severe inflammation of the intestinal mucosa leading to like the clinical presentations associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [33]. IBD is a chronic inflammatory disease of the gastrointestinal tract in humans that can be divided into those with Crohn’s disease, where disease may be present throughout the GI tract and those with Ulcerative Colitis, where disease is limited to the colon. There has been speculation that Crohn’s disease may be caused by MAP as well [34].

In the present study, a strong association between a variant of EDN2, rs110287192, and pTB susceptibility in Holstein and two Turkish indigenous cattle crossbreds was demonstrated, validating, and extending the association that was previously described [18,19]. Such validation provides important support for the biological role and practical application of genomic selection for this variant [35]. Furthermore, our data also contributes to the understanding of bovine pTB and provides information that may be useful as an approach to reduce the disease through selection. Selecting against animals with the rs110287192-GG genotype may decrease the risk of pTB in Bos taurus cattle. Further analyses that are combining EDN2 genotyping and holistic expression methods through expanded sampling of other cattle breeds together with blood mRNA and serum samples for protein expression are recommended to better understand the role genomic selection could play in reducing the susceptibility to pTB in cattle.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Primer and probes, used for genotyping of EDN2 rs109651404, rs110287192 and rs136707411 SNPs.

F: forward; R: reverse; * assay IDs given by prob production company.

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

The authors indebted to Ms. Codie Durfee for technical assistance during experiments.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This research was financially supported by the Turkish Research Council (Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştirma Kurumu (TÜBİTAK)) grant number 218O128 to MUC and the funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Whittington R, Donat K, Weber MF, Kelton D, Nielsen SS, Eisenberg S, et al. Control of paratuberculosis: Who, why and how. A review of 48 countries. BMC Vet Res. 2019; 1–29. 10.1186/s12917-018-1758-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lambrecht R, Collins MT. Mycobacterium paratuberculosis. Factors that influence mycobactin dependence. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1992;15(3): 239–246. 10.1016/0732-8893(92)90119-e [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Whittington RJ, Marshall DJ, Nicholls PJ, Marsh IB, Reddacliff LA. Survival and dormancy of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in the environment. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70: 2989–3004. 10.1128/aem.70.5.2989-3004.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Marcé C, Ezanno P, Weber MF, Seegers H, Pfeiffer DU, Fourichon C. Invited review: Modeling within-herd transmission of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis in dairy cattle: A review. J Dairy Sci. 2010;93: 4455–4470. 10.3168/jds.2010-3139 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Verteramo Chiu LJ, Tauer LW, Al-Mamun MA, Kaniyamattam K, Smith RL, Grohn YT. An agent-based model evaluation of economic control strategies for paratuberculosis in a dairy herd. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101: 6443–6454. 10.3168/jds.2017-13175 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Groenendaal H, Nielen M, Jalvingh AW, Horst SH, Galligan DT, Hesselink JW. A simulation of Johne’s disease control. Prev Vet Med. 2002;54: 225–245. 10.1016/s0167-5877(02)00027-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bhattarai B, Fosgate GT, Osterstock JB, Fossler CP, Park SC, Roussel AJ. Perceptions of veterinarians in bovine practice and producers with beef cow-calf operations enrolled in the US Voluntary Bovine Johne’s Disease Control Program concerning economic losses associated with Johne’s disease. Prev Vet Med. 2013;112: 330–337. 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.08.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Timms VJ, Daskalopoulos G, Mitchell HM, Neilan BA. The Association of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis with Inflammatory Bowel Disease. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0148731 10.1371/journal.pone.0148731 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.McNees AL, Markesich D, Zayyani NR, Graham DY. Mycobacterium paratuberculosis as a cause of Crohn’s disease. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;9: 1523–1534. 10.1586/17474124.2015.1093931 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Raadsma HW, Conington J. Breeding for disease resistance in farm animals [Internet]. Bishop SC, Axford RFE, Nicholas FW, Owen JB, editors. Wallingford: CABI; 2010. 10.1079/9781845935559.0000 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bishop SC, Woolliams JA. Genomics and disease resistance studies in livestock. Livest Sci. 2014;166: 190–198. 10.1016/j.livsci.2014.04.034 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Davenport AP, Hyndman KA, Dhaun N, Southan C, Kohan DE, Pollock JS, et al. Endothelin. Pharmacol Rev. 2016;68(2): 357–418. 10.1124/pr.115.011833 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Kohan DE, Rossi NF, Inscho EW, Pollock DM. Regulation of blood pressure and salt homeostasis by endothelin. Physiol Rev. 2011;1–77. 10.1152/physrev.00060.2009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ervin JM, Schütz LF, Spicer LJ. Current status of the role of endothelins in regulating ovarian follicular function: A review. Anim Reprod Sci. 2017;1–10. 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2017.09.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Takizawa S, Uchide T, Adur J, Kozakai T, Kotake-Nara E, Quan J, et al. Differential expression of endothelin-2 along the mouse intestinal tract. J Mol Endocrinol. 2005;35: 201–209. 10.1677/jme.1.01787 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Klipper E, Levit A, Mastich Y, Berisha B, Schams D, Meidan R. Induction of endothelin-2 expression by luteinizing hormone and hypoxia: Possible role in bovine corpus luteum formation. Endocrinology. 2010;151: 1914–1922. 10.1210/en.2009-0767 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Liu H, Luo Q, Zhang J, Mo C, Wang Y, Li J. Endothelins (EDN1, EDN2, EDN3) and their receptors (EDNRA, EDNRB, EDNRB2) in chickens: Functional analysis and tissue distribution. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2019;283: 113231 10.1016/j.ygcen.2019.113231 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Settles M, Zanella R, McKay SD, Schnabel RD, Taylor JF, Whitlock R, et al. A whole genome association analysis identifies loci associated with Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis infection status in US Holstein cattle. Anim Genet. 2009;40: 655–662. 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2009.01896.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Neibergs HL, Settles ML, Whitlock RH, Taylor JF. GSEA-SNP identifies genes associated with Johne’s disease in cattle. Mamm Genome. 2010;21: 419–425. 10.1007/s00335-010-9278-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Neibergs HL, Ricardo Z, Taylor JF, Wang Z, Scraggs E, White SN, et al. Compositions and methods for diagnosis of genetic susceptibility, resistance, or tolerance to infection by mycobacteria and bovine paratuberculosis using promoter variants of EDN2. Google patents [Preprint]. 2014 [cited 2020 April 17]. Available: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140283151
  • 21.Cinar MU, Hizlisoy H, Akyüz B, Arslan K, Aksel EG, Gümüşsoy KS. Polymorphisms in toll-like receptor (TLR) 1, 4, 9 and SLC11A1 genes and their association with paratuberculosis susceptibility in Holstein and indigenous crossbred cattle in Turkey. J Genet. 2018;97: 1147–1154. Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30555064 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Rathnaiah G, Zinniel DK, Bannantine JP, Stabel JR, Gröhn YT, Collins MT, et al. Pathogenesis, molecular genetics, and genomics of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis, the etiologic agent of Johne’s disease. Front Vet Sci. 2017;4: 187 10.3389/fvets.2017.00187 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Schmitt H, Neufert C, Neurath MF, Atreya R. Resolution of Crohn’s disease. Semin Immunopathol. 2019;41(6): 737–746. 10.1007/s00281-019-00756-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Van Hulzen KJE, Koets AP, Nielen M, Heuven HCM, Van Arendonk JAM, Klinkenberg D. The effect of genetic selection for Johne’s disease resistance in dairy cattle: Results of a genetic-epidemiological model. J Dairy Sci. 2014;97: 1762–1773. 10.3168/jds.2013-7032 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Norton S, Heuer C, Jackson R. A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study of clinical johne’s disease on dairy farms in New Zealand. N Z Vet J. 2009;57: 34–43. 10.1080/00480169.2009.36866 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Sorge US, Lissemore K, Godkin A, Hendrick S, Wells S, Kelton D. Associations between paratuberculosis milk ELISA result, milk production, and breed in Canadian dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2011;94: 754–761. 10.3168/jds.2010-3404 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Cetinkaya B, Erdogan HM, Morgan KL. Relationships between the presence of Johne’s disease and farm and management factors in dairy cattle in England. Prev Vet Med. 1997;32: 253–66. 10.1016/s0167-5877(97)00028-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.González-Ruiz S, Strillacci MG, Durán-Aguilar M, Cantó-Alarcón GJ, Herrera-Rodríguez SE, Bagnato A, et al. Genome-wide association study in mexican holstein cattle reveals novel quantitative trait loci regions and confirms mapped loci for resistance to bovine tuberculosis. Animals (Basel). 2019;9(9): 636 10.3390/ani9090636 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Neupane M, Kiser JN, Neibergs HL. Gene set enrichment analysis of SNP data in dairy and beef cattle with bovine respiratory disease. Anim Genet. 2018;49: 527–538. 10.1111/age.12718 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Cacioppo JA, Oh SW, Kim HY, Cho J, Lin PCP, Yanagisawa M, et al. Loss of function of endothelin-2 leads to reduced ovulation and CL formation. PLoS One. 2014;9 10.1371/journal.pone.0096115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Iwai M, Hasegawa M, Taii S, Sagawa N, Nakao K, Imura H, et al. Endothelins inhibit luteinization of cultured porcine granulosa cells. Endocrinology. 1991;129: 1909–1914. 10.1210/endo-129-4-1909 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Yildiz HM, Carlson TL, Goldstein AM, Carrier RL. Mucus barriers to microparticles and microbes are altered in Hirschsprung’s disease. Macromol Biosci. 2015;15: 712–718. 10.1002/mabi.201400473 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Nakamura H, Lim T, Puri P. Inflammatory bowel disease in patients with Hirschsprung’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2018;34: 149–154. 10.1007/s00383-017-4182-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Pierce ES. Could Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis cause Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis…and colorectal cancer? Infect Agent Cancer. 2018;13: 1 10.1186/s13027-017-0172-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.White SN, Knowles DP. Expanding possibilities for intervention against small ruminant lentiviruses through genetic marker-assisted selective breeding. Viruses. 2013;5(6): 1466–1499. 10.3390/v5061466 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Jasim Muhammad Uddin

1 Jul 2020

PONE-D-20-15004

The EDN2 rs110287192 Gene Polymorphism is Associated with Paratuberculosis Susceptibility in Multibreed Cattle Population

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Çınar,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 15 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jasim Muhammad Uddin, DVM, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

There is a very strong link between Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis in ruminant and Crohn's disease in humans but the cause of the later is not clear. However, have the authors found any Crohn's disease/like symptom in humans/farmers/animal handlers in the MAP-positive farm? The public health importance would be good to discuss in the manuscript.

Though this study focused on association with SNPs, the details epidemiology of the disease in cattle population should be discussed. How animals were selected? Is there any prevalence study of this disease in the region? Is there any link with age, breed, nr in farm, husbandry practice, and human?

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

'Funding information: This research was financially supported by the Turkish Research Council (TUBITAK) grant number 218O128.

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

'The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.'

  1. Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

  2. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

  3. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

  4. If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

4. Your ethics statement must appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please also ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics section of your online submission will not be published alongside your manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Line 86-90: Do you have any data for your country (Turkey) to show how impact of this disease in your country?

Line 139: Total animal is 818 animals but in this line number you have written 68 infected and 753 healthy animals so 68+753 is not 818.

Result Part: You have 3 breeds and why not give the result for the association genotyping result individual breed. Individual association for breeding might be give strong results that SNP will affect on these 3 breeds or not. This is better to analysis SNP in each breed.

Reviewer #2: -The authors mentioned the aims of this study to analyse a potential association between EDN2 gene with pTB. To support more justification EDN2 as a candidate gene, could more explain about the position of EDN2 in chromosome is related with pTB and why the mutation that author chose synonymous mutation

- The sample were collected from three regions. How about the environment condition, are they in the same condition. Please explain more clearly

- For genotyping used custom Taqman SNP genotyping assay. It was not really clear mentioned in the methodology why used this method?

- In statistical part using proc logistic. Are this statistical model is common to used by previous study and authors were not put also the mathematical model for these analysis. Any specific reason why using Proc Logistic because normally to perform association using GLM model

- Paten number should be written in the methodology

- In Table 1, the number of animal between SNP that authors examined were different. Why the number of animal were different for example the first, second and third SNP were 796; 769 and 751 respectively

- By perform association study, is it sufficient enough to determine by choosing rs110287192-GG genotype may decrease the risk pTB in cattle without support functional study such as expression study mRNA and protein. Could authors extend to see how the expression between healthy and infected. We suggest to validate also on functional study using significant SNP rs110287192 by comparing infected and healthy animals.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr.agr. Asep Gunawan.Department Animal Production and Technology. Faculty of Animal Science, IPB University. Indonesia

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Sep 3;15(9):e0238631. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238631.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


23 Jul 2020

ONE-D-20-15004

The EDN2 rs110287192 Gene Polymorphism is Associated with Paratuberculosis Susceptibility in Multibreed Cattle Population

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Çınar,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 15 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jasim Muhammad Uddin, DVM, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Comment: Additional Editor Comments:

Comment 1: There is a very strong link between Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis in ruminant and Crohn's disease in humans but the cause of the later is not clear. However, have the authors found any Crohn's disease/like symptom in humans/farmers/animal handlers in the MAP-positive farm?

Response 1: There are strong clues that Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) the cause of a chronic intestinal disease in domestic and wild ruminants may cause of idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease (IIBD). Crohn’s disease is one of the IIBD form together with ulcerative colitis. However, in the present investigation, we did not follow up neither consumer’s health status nor farmers. To the best of our knowledge in Turkey, there is no study that investigate the prevalence of Crohn’s disease that caused by MAP. Nevertheless, in literature, experiments, were performed in other countries showed the MAP zoonotic transmission from domestic animals to humans.

Wynne JW, Bull TJ, Seemann T, et al. Exploring the zoonotic potential of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis through comparative genomics. PLoS One. 2011;6:e22171.

Pierce, E. S. (2018). Could Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis cause Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis… and colorectal cancer? Infectious Agents and Cancer, 13(1), 1-6.

In the manuscript, there is a sentence in the discussion “IBD is a chronic inflammatory disease of the gastrointestinal tract in humans that can be divided into those with Crohn’s disease, where disease may be present throughout the GI tract and those with Ulcerative Colitis, where disease is limited to the colon. There has been speculation that Crohn’s disease may be caused by MAP as well [34].”

34 Pierce, E. S. (2018). Could Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis cause Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis… and colorectal cancer? Infectious Agents and Cancer, 13(1), 1-6.

Comment 2: The public health importance would be good to discuss in the manuscript.

Though this study focused on association with SNPs, the details epidemiology of the disease in cattle population should be discussed. How animals were selected? Is there any prevalence study of this disease in the region? Is there any link with age, breed, nr in farm, husbandry practice, and human?

Response 2: Animals were selected according to clinical observations. Cattle, showed clinical signs of pTB as cachexia and diarrhea, were subjected to experiment. All, animals were in the same age; they were in 2-3 years old and exposed to the same environmental condition. The same region previously investigated by Gumussoy et al. (2015). There pTB prevalence was found 12.2% for Holstein and in our experiment, prevalence was identified as 11.7% which was cited in our previous article Cinar et al. 2018 and that was cited in the current manuscript as [21].

Gümüşsoy, K. S., Ica, T., Abay, S., Aydin, F., & Hizlisoy, H. (2015). Serological and molecular diagnosis of paratuberculosis in dairy cattle. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 39(2), 147-153.

Cinar MU, Hizlisoy H, Akyüz B, Arslan K, Aksel EG, Gümüşsoy KS. Polymorphisms in toll-like receptor (TLR) 1, 4, 9 and SLC11A1 genes and their association with paratuberculosis susceptibility in Holstein and indigenous crossbred cattle in Turkey. J Genet. 2018;97: 1147–1154.

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Comment 1: 1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Response 1: Thanks for reminder, we have checked and modified accordingly.

Comment 2: 2. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

'Funding information: This research was financially supported by the Turkish Research Council (TUBITAK) grant number 218O128.

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

'The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.'

a. Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

b. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d. If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Response 2: We have removed funding information from the acknowledgement and stated in the online Funding Statement section.

Comment 3: Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Response 3: We have given our amendment in the cover letter.

Comment 4: 3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

Response 4: Revised accordingly.

Comment 5: 4. Your ethics statement must appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please also ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics section of your online submission will not be published alongside your manuscript.

Response 5: Thanks for reminder. I have deleted the “Compliance with ethical standards:” section in the revised version of manuscript.

Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1

Comment 1: Reviewer #1: Line 86-90: Do you have any data for your country (Turkey) to show how impact of this disease in your country?

Response 1: There are few literatures about the local (province level) prevalence of paratuberculosis in Turkey, done by using different detection methods such as serology and PCR. But those experiments have subjected limited number of animals and farms. Additionally, no comprehensive sampling and analyzing method was applied in national level, therefore, no economic analysis had been generated in which deals with the loss which is caused by paratuberculosis in Turkey.

Comment 2: Line 139: Total animal is 818 animals but in this line number you have written 68 infected and 753 healthy animals so 68+753 is not 818.

Response 2: Sorry for inconvenience. There was a typing error. The number of healthy animals were corrected as 750 in the revised manuscript.

Comment 3: Result Part: You have 3 breeds and why not give the result for the association genotyping result individual breed. Individual association for breeding might be give strong results that SNP will affect on these 3 breeds or not. This is better to analysis SNP in each breed.

Response 3: Thank for the comment. There were two reasons not to apply single breed analysis instead of multi-breed analysis. First, the number of cases were lower in native-crossbreds compared to Holsteins. There were 7 pTB cases and 4 pTB cases were detected in East Anatolian Red crosbred and Anatolian Black crosbred, respectively. On the other hand, 57 pTB cases were identified in the Holsteins. Hence, we thought, since our aim was to identify association of the mutations with the pTB status, we used multi-breed approach. Second, researcher stated the advantages of using multiple breedsfor association analysis in literature and applied this method in many animal species (Ramayo-Caldas et al. 2016, Bianchi et al. 2015, van den Berg, Boichard, Lund, 2016).Karlsson et al. (2007) stated that using multiple breeds that share the same phenotype, may decrease the noise, and help to identify selected loci accurately.

Karlsson, E., Baranowska, I., Wade, C. et al. Efficient mapping of mendelian traits in dogs through genome-wide association. Nat Genet 39, 1321–1328 (2007).

Ramayo-Caldas, Y., Renand, G., Ballester, M., Saintilan, R., & Rocha, D. (2016). Multi-breed and multi-trait co-association analysis of meat tenderness and other meat quality traits in three French beef cattle breeds. Genetics Selection Evolution, 48(1), 37.

Bianchi, M., Dahlgren, S., Massey, J., Dietschi, E., Kierczak, M., Lund-Ziener, M., & Ollier, W. E. (2015). A multi-breed genome-wide association analysis for canine hypothyroidism identifies a shared major risk locus on CFA12. PLoS One, 10(8), e0134720.

van den Berg, I., Boichard, D., & Lund, M. S. (2016). Comparing power and precision of within-breed and multibreed genome-wide association studies of production traits using whole-genome sequence data for 5 French and Danish dairy cattle breeds. Journal of Dairy Science, 99(11), 8932-8945.

Reviewer #2

Comment 1: The authors mentioned the aims of this study to analyse a potential association between EDN2 gene with pTB. To support more justification EDN2 as a candidate gene, could more explain about the position of EDN2 in chromosome is related with pTB and why the mutation that author chose synonymous mutation

Response 1: In livestock, EDN2 has been investigated for its corpus luteum formation in cattle. However, no research was devoted for the association of bovine EDN2 with immune traits. EDN2 mutations, selected for the current work taken from the previous studies. Settles et al. [18] and Neibergs et al. [19] reported EDN2 as a strong functional and positional candidate gene for pTB susceptibility in Holstein cattle according to GWA study. Three EDN2 synonymous mutations, named rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs109490418, were patented for being associated with pTB susceptibility in Holstein breed cattle [20].

18. Settles M, Zanella R, McKay SD, Schnabel RD, Taylor JF, Whitlock R, et al. A whole genome association analysis identifies loci associated with Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis infection status in US holstein cattle. Anim Genet. 2009;40: 655–662. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2052.2009.01896.x

19. Neibergs HL, Settles ML, Whitlock RH, Taylor JF. GSEA-SNP identifies genes associated with Johne’s disease in cattle. Mamm Genome. 2010;21: 419–425. doi:10.1007/s00335-010-9278-2

20. Neibergs HL, Ricardo Z, Taylor JF, Wang Z, Scraggs E, White SN, et al. Compositions and methods for diagnosis of genetic susceptibility, resistance, or tolerance to infection by mycobacteria and bovine paratuberculosis using promoter variants of EDN2. Google patents [Preprint]. 2014 [cited 2020 April 17]. Available: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140283151

Response 2: Although EDN2 has been investigated for its corpus luteum formation in cattle

Comment 2: - The sample were collected from three regions. How about the environment condition, are they in the same condition. Please explain more clearly

Response 2: All animals were subjected to same environmental condition. Samples were taken in summer and they were kept in the same farm that they were fed with the same ratio. “Animals included in the present study were housed in similar environmental conditions” statement has already been mentioned in the sample collection section.

Comment 2: - For genotyping used custom Taqman SNP genotyping assay. It was not really clear mentioned in the methodology why used this method?

Response 2: The mutations, were genotyped in the present work derived from a previous GWAS study. TaqMan genotyping method could be one of the most cost and time efficient method for these kinds of mutations identified by GWAS. TaqMan system is one of the earliest methods for SNP genotyping, based on fluorescently-tagged, allele-specific probes detected using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based assays. Since mutations did not genotyped before elsewhere, no literature mentioned about RFLP enzyme for DNA digestion. Therefore, we had to designed custom TaqMan assays for the respective mutations.

The sentence was added in the revised manuscript: “Since current SNPs have not been genotyped by using any other method, the custom TaqMan chemistry was selected as cost and time effective genotyping method.”

Osaki, R., Imaeda, H., Ban, H., Aomatsu, T., Bamba, S., Tsujikawa, T., & Andoh, A. (2011). Accuracy of genotyping using the TaqMan PCR assay for single nucleotide polymorphisms responsible for thiopurine sensitivity in Japanese patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2(5), 783-786.

Comment 3: - In statistical part using proc logistic. Are this statistical model is common to used by previous study and authors were not put also the mathematical model for these analysis. Any specific reason why using Proc Logistic because normally to perform association using GLM model

Response 3: Binary logistic regression is useful where the dependent variable is dichotomous (e.g., healthy/sick, live/die, graduate/dropout, vote for A or B). Proc Logistic is very similar to Proc GLM, although it has a binary outcome variable rather than an interval outcome.If the outcome is ordinal, Proc Logistic can also be used, but with a complementary log-log link function instead of the more standard log function. Logistic regression also defines odds ratios for the input variables. There are similar articles analyze the same type of data by using Proc Logistic.

Vázquez P, Ruiz-Larrañaga O, Garrido JM, et al. Genetic association analysis of paratuberculosis forms in holstein-friesian cattle. Vet Med Int. 2014;2014:321327. doi:10.1155/2014/321327

Ruiz-Larrañaga O, Garrido JM, Manzano C, et al. Identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms in the bovine solute carrier family 11 member 1 (SLC11A1) gene and their association with infection by Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis. J Dairy Sci. 2010;93(4):1713-1721. doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2438

Bhaladhare A, Sharma D, Kumar A, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphisms in toll-like receptor genes and case-control association studies with bovine tuberculosis. Vet World. 2016;9(5):458-464. doi:10.14202/vetworld.2016.458-464

Mohd Baqir, Saket Bhushan, Amit Kumar, Arvind Sonawane, Ranvir Singh, Anuj Chauhan, Ramji Yadav, Om Prakash, Renjith R, Aashish Baladhare & Deepak Sharma (2016) Association of polymorphisms in SLC11A1 gene with bovine tuberculosis trait among Indian cattle, Journal of Applied Animal Research, 44:1, 380-383, doi: 10.1080/09712119.2015.1091333

Comment 4: - Paten number should be written in the methodology

Response 4: The sentence was modified in the revised manuscript.

From:intergenic variant and rs109490418–g.104706758G>A in 3′ UTR variant mutations were patented by [20]

To:intergenic variant and rs109490418–g.104706758G>A in 3′ UTR variant mutations were patented by Neibergs et al. patent# US20140283151 [20]

Comment 5: - In Table 1, the number of animal between SNP that authors examined were different. Why the number of animal were different for example the first, second and third SNP were 796; 769 and 751 respectively

Response 5: Thanks for this point. The reason why animal number showing variability was the missing genotypes. Due to limited budget, we had no chance to repeat animals. However, animal numbers per genotype is still over 200, which is recommended for reliable association analysis.

Comment 6: - By perform association study, is it sufficient to determine by choosing rs110287192-GG genotype may decrease the risk pTB in cattle without support functional study such as expression study mRNA and protein. Could authors extend to see how the expression between healthy and infected. We suggest validating also on functional study using significant SNP rs110287192 by comparing infected and healthy animals.

Response 6: The current experiment was aimed to identify the favorable genotype for pTB resistancy. Reviewer is right to ask whether EDN2 was the correct candidate gene for pTB susceptibility. Authors are planning for to continue the functional genomic analysis such as RNA-Seq and Western Blot analysis for EDN2 gene. However, this needs animal should be bought from farmers after validated to be pTB. Further financial applications are warranted to perform functional genomics experiments in order to investigate pTB susceptibility.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-20-15004 R1 Response to Reviewers.doc

Decision Letter 1

Jasim Muhammad Uddin

18 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-15004R1

The EDN2 rs110287192 Gene Polymorphism is Associated with Paratuberculosis Susceptibility in Multibreed Cattle Population

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Çınar,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but one of the reviewer has additional queries. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 02 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jasim Muhammad Uddin, DVM, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

No more comments from me but please address the queries from Dr Gunawan.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The author was response from the reviewers clearly and corrected according to the suggestion as well. The manuscript is currently in scientific standard for publication in this journal. However, the next scientific report in deeply still needed. Hope the author using the scientific to solve this problem in livestock production.

Reviewer #2: The authors have revised their manuscript and taken some, but not all of my earlier comments into account.

1. It is still unclear what the the EDN2 position or is located in the BTA (Bos Taurus) chromosom. Please meantion it in which chromosome?. If the authors mentioned are taken from GWAS study explain litle bit information in the manuscript to support these gene is important related to pTB.

2. Authors have explained that the animal which used in this study were in the same environment condition. The sample were collected in summer time based on reviewed response. Could authors added in the manuscript including also the age of cattle to emphesized that only effect of genetic EDN2 that would be obsreved.

3. In line 224-225, authors observed suggestive association between the EDN2

rs136707411 and increased pTB risk. Its better to put the level of p-value which is categorized as suggestive association forisntance (P<0.10) etc

4. Line 251-252: No genotype of EDN2 rs109651404 were found to be significant

252 associated with pTB (all p > 0.05). This sentence could be merge with previous paragraph because only consist few sentences.

5 Line 308-311, Further analyses through expanded sampling of other cattle breeds are recommended to better understand the role genomic selection could play in reducing the susceptibility to pTB in cattle. Based on previous comment please add not only the large number of cattle which should be added, but also it is needed functional study of EDN2 at the level of mRNA and protein expression. Authors could seen paper related below:

Gunawan, A., K. Kaewmala, M.J. Uddin, M. U. Cinar, D. Tesfaye, C. Phatsara, E. Tholen, C. Looft, and K. Schellander. 2011. Association study and expression analysis of porcine ESR1 as a candidate gene for boar fertility and sperm quality. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 128: 11-21.

Gunawan, A., K. Kaewmala, M.J. Uddin, M. U. Cinar, D. Tesfaye, C. Phatsara, E. Tholen, C. Looft, and K. Schellander. 2011. Investigation on association and expression of ESR2 as a candidate gene for boar sperm quality and fertility. Domest. Reprod. Anim. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2011.01968.x

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Prof. Dr.agr. Asep Gunawan, SPt, MSc

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewer Comments ASG 11.08.2020.docx

PLoS One. 2020 Sep 3;15(9):e0238631. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238631.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


19 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-15004R1

The EDN2 rs110287192 Gene Polymorphism is Associated with Paratuberculosis Susceptibility in Multibreed Cattle Population

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Comment 1: No more comments from me but please address the queries from Dr Gunawan.

Response 1: Thanks editor for improving the quality of manuscript.

Reviewer Comments:

Reviewer #1:

Comment 1: The author was response from the reviewers clearly and corrected according to the suggestion as well. The manuscript is currently in scientific standard for publication in this journal. However, the next scientific report in deeply still needed. Hope the author using the scientific to solve this problem in livestock production.

Response 1: Thanks reviewer for improving the quality of manuscript. We are continuing to work in pTB, we are going to inform Ministry of Agriculture in Turkey in terms of our results. They may evaluate results and may suggest to use in selection programs.

Reviewer #2:

Comment 1: The authors have revised their manuscript and taken some, but not all of my earlier comments into account.

Response 1: We tried to answer all points. Sorry for inconvenience, we answer all points in this version.

Comment 2: 1. It is still unclear what the the EDN2 position or is located in the BTA (Bos Taurus) chromosom. Please meantion it in which chromosome?. If the authors mentioned are taken from GWAS study explain litle bit information in the manuscript to support these gene is important related to pTB.

Response 2: Chromosome location of three EDN2 mutations were given and details of previous GWAS study was mentioned in the manuscript. The sentence was modified as:

In addition, Settles et al. [18] and Neibergs et al. [19] reported EDN2 as a strong functional and positional candidate gene for pTB susceptibility in Holstein cattle according to GWAS study. EDN2 locus on bovine chromosome 3 was identified with genome-wide significant level of association to the presence of MAP in tissue and both tissue and feces respectively [18]. Three EDN2 synonymous mutations on bovine chromosome 3 (BTA3), named rs110287192, rs109651404 and rs109490418 were patented for being associated with pTB susceptibility in Holstein breed cattle [20].

Comment 3: 2. Authors have explained that the animal which used in this study were in the same environment condition. The sample were collected in summer time based on reviewed response. Could authors added in the manuscript including also the age of cattle to emphesized that only effect of genetic EDN2 that would be obsreved.

Response 3: Age of cattle was mentioned in the sample collection sub-section in line 132 in the revised manuscript.

Comment 4: 3. In line 224-225, authors observed suggestive association between the EDN2

rs136707411 and increased pTB risk. Its better to put the level of p-value which is categorized as suggestive association forisntance (P<0.10) etc

Response 4: p value was added in the revised version (L228).

Comment 5: 4. Line 251-252: No genotype of EDN2 rs109651404 were found to be significant

252 associated with pTB (all p > 0.05). This sentence could be merge with previous paragraph because only consist few sentences.

Response 5: The sentence was merged with the previous paragraph as asuggested.

Comment 6: 5 Line 308-311, Further analyses through expanded sampling of other cattle breeds are recommended to better understand the role genomic selection could play in reducing the susceptibility to pTB in cattle. Based on previous comment please add not only the large number of cattle which should be added, but also it is needed functional study of EDN2 at the level of mRNA and protein expression. Authors could seen paper related below:

Gunawan, A., K. Kaewmala, M.J. Uddin, M. U. Cinar, D. Tesfaye, C. Phatsara, E. Tholen, C. Looft, and K. Schellander. 2011. Association study and expression analysis of porcine ESR1 as a candidate gene for boar fertility and sperm quality. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 128: 11-21.

Gunawan, A., K. Kaewmala, M.J. Uddin, M. U. Cinar, D. Tesfaye, C. Phatsara, E. Tholen, C. Looft, and K. Schellander. 2011. Investigation on association and expression of ESR2 as a candidate gene for boar sperm quality and fertility. Domest. Reprod. Anim. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0531.2011.01968.x

Response 6: There is no experimental infection unit in Turkey suitable for bovine experiments. However, we are planning to collect slaughterhouse tissue and organ samples from pTB positive and negative animals too. Thanks for sample articles and suggestion. We have revised the sentence accordingly.

Further analyses that are combining genotyping and holistic gene expression methods through expanded sampling of other cattle breeds together with blood mRNA and serum protein samples are recommended to better understand the role genomic selection could play in reducing the susceptibility to pTB in cattle.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-20-15004 R2 Response to Reviewers.doc

Decision Letter 2

Jasim Muhammad Uddin

21 Aug 2020

The EDN2 rs110287192 Gene Polymorphism is Associated with Paratuberculosis Susceptibility in Multibreed Cattle Population

PONE-D-20-15004R2

Dear Prof Cinar

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Jasim Muhammad Uddin, DVM, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

No further comments. I am pleased to inform you that the manuscript is acceptable.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Jasim Muhammad Uddin

25 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-15004R2

The EDN2 rs110287192 gene polymorphism is associated with paratuberculosis susceptibility in multibreed cattle population

Dear Dr. Çınar:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Jasim Muhammad Uddin

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Primer and probes, used for genotyping of EDN2 rs109651404, rs110287192 and rs136707411 SNPs.

    F: forward; R: reverse; * assay IDs given by prob production company.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-20-15004 R1 Response to Reviewers.doc

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewer Comments ASG 11.08.2020.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-20-15004 R2 Response to Reviewers.doc

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES