Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Jun 2;16(6):e0249291. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249291

Naturally-derived protein extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs

Keya Ganguly 1,#, Sayan Deb Dutta 1,#, Min-Soo Jeong 2, Dinesh K Patel 1, Seong-Jun Cho 2,*, Ki-Taek Lim 1,*
Editor: Gianpaolo Papaccio3
PMCID: PMC8172014  PMID: 34077422

Abstract

Naturally-derived proteins or peptides are promising biopolymers for tissue engineering applications owing to their health-promoting activity. Herein, we extracted proteins (~90%) from two-spotted cricket (Gryllus bimaculatus) and evaluated their osteoinductive potential in human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hBMSCs) under in vitro conditions. The extracted protein isolate was analyzed for the amino acid composition and the mass distribution of the constituent peptide fraction. Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy was used to determine the presence of biologically significant functional groups. The cricket protein isolate (CPI) exhibited characteristic protein peaks in the FTIR spectrum. Notably, an enhanced cell viability was observed in the presence of the extracted proteins, showing their biocompatibility. The CPI also exhibited antioxidant properties in a concentration-dependent manner. More significant mineralization was observed in the CPI-treated cells than in the control, suggesting their osteoinductive potential. The upregulation of the osteogenic marker genes (Runx2, ALP, OCN, and BSP) in CPI treated media compared with the control supports their osteoinductive nature. Therefore, cricket-derived protein isolates could be used as functional protein isolate for tissue engineering applications, especially for bone regeneration.

Introduction

Millions of patients suffer from bone-related disorders globally, including osteoporosis, osteosarcoma, and chondrosarcoma, which require bone replacement, and surgical interventions [1]. Autologous and allograft bone replacement techniques are useful clinical procedures for orthopedic treatment; however, bone tissue engineering is an emerging alternative to the existing medical procedures [2]. The efficiency of bone tissue regeneration in vitro and in vivo is augmented by using suitable osteoconductive and osteoinductive biomaterials [3,4] and bioactive molecules [5]. The tissue regeneration process is extensively supported by proteins, such as transforming growth factor-β (TGF- β) superfamily proteins, fibroblast growth factors (FGFs), insulin-like growth factors (IGFs), and platelet-derived growth factors (PDGFs) [6,7]. However, the application of bioactive protein molecules can augment the bone formation rate during the healing process. Thus, it is crucial to identify bioactive proteins that can promote the complex bone formation process under clinical conditions.

Animals and plants are promising sources of numerous osteoinductive compounds [810]. Insects also constitute an enriched source of proteins, essential fatty acids, and minerals. Gryllus bimaculatus, known as the two-spotted cricket, is extensively utilized in food science research and traditional medicine for its protein content [11]. Moreover, cricket-derived proteins also show antioxidative and immunomodulatory properties [12]. However, the bone tissue regeneration potential of cricket-derived protein material has not yet been fully explored. An in vitro assessment of the effect of cricket-derived protein on the osteogenic differentiation of human bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (hBMSCs), which are involved in the development and maintenance of osteoblasts, osteocytes, and osteoclasts [1318], could provide insights into the efficacy of the cricket-derived protein as an osteoinductive biopolymer.

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the cricket protein isolate (CPI) on the osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs under in vitro conditions for its potential clinical applications. CPI was characterized using Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to assess the topological-mediated interaction between CPI and hBMSCs. In addition, the protein mass range and amino acid composition were determined to identify the effects of the nutritional composition of CPI on hBMSC osteogenic differentiation. Additionally, the antioxidative properties of CPI were analyzed to evaluate its efficiency in reducing cellular oxidative stress. Moreover, the biocompatibility, mineralization efficiency, and variations in the osteogenic marker gene expression in the presence of CPI were investigated to confirm its possible roles in hBMSC osteoinduction. We anticipate that CPI can be used as an osteoinductive material for the fabrication of osteoinductive scaffolds or as an alternative to expensive protein supplements to treat bone-related diseases.

Materials and methods

Materials

Crickets were collected from Wonju Natural Ecology Park (Wonju, Republic of Korea). Laemmli buffer (5×) and protein ladder were purchased from Dyne Bio Inc., Seongnam, Republic of Korea. Coomassie Brilliant Blue and SYBR Green Master mix were supplied by Bio-Rad Laboratories, USA. Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium (DMEM), 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), Dulbecco’s phosphate-buffered saline (DPBS), and antibiotics were purchased from Welgene Inc., Republic of Korea. Trypsin-ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (Trypsin-EDTA) was provided by Gibco, USA. Osteo-induction media, 4,6-diamino-2-phenylindole dihydrochloride (DAPI), and alizarin red (ARS) staining kit were acquired from Sigma-Aldrich, USA. WST-1 dye and Alexa Fluor conjugated monoclonal antibodies were purchased from DoGenBio Co., Ltd., Republic of Korea, and Santa Cruz Biotechnology, USA, respectively. TRIzol® reagent, Acridine orange, and Ethidium bromide stains were purchased from Invitrogen, Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA. The cDNA synthesis kit was obtained from Invitrogen, Gaithersburg. The gene primers were supplied by BIONEER®Inc., Daejeon, Republic of Korea.

Defatting and protein extraction

Crickets were fed with corns and cabbages and were harvested at 42 days from their hatching. The killing of crickets was accomplished with CO2 treatment and stored at -80°C for further experiments. The stored crickets were lyophilized and ground by a pulverizer (RT-N08, Rong Tsong Precision Technology, Taichung, Taiwan). The defatting process was done, as described earlier [19]. Briefly, the required amounts of cricket powders were dispersed in an ethanol solution (99.5%) and agitated for 4 h, and the solvent was replaced within 2 h of intervals. The filtrate was left to dry at room temperature, followed by the addition of the required amounts of water, and stirred for 30 min. The pH of the suspension was maintained to 11 by adding 2.5 M sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and agitated for 60 min at room temperature (RT). The mixture was centrifuged at 3200g for 20 min and filtered by Whatman grade 41 filter paper (Whatman plc, Maidstone, UK). The isoelectric point of CPI (pH 4.0) was achieved by adding 2.5 M HCl solution in the supernatant and subsequently agitated for 30 min at RT. After this, the acidified mixture was centrifuged at 3200g for 20 min, followed by lyophilization. The dried sample was stored till further use. The schematic representation for the extraction of protein from the insect is given in Fig 1.

Fig 1. Schematic illustration of protein extraction from Gryllus bimaculatus.

Fig 1

CPI chemical characterization

Determination of the nutrient composition

The amino acid content in the CPI was analyzed using an amino acid analyzer (HITACHI L-8900, Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation, Japan) with the ninhydrin method. The proximate composition of the CPI was analyzed according to the AOAC methods [20]. The protein content of CPI was determined using the Kjeldahl method with a protein-to-nitrogen conversion factor of 6.25. The ash content was measured by burning the sample in a furnace. The crude fat was analyzed according to the Soxhlet method measuring the crude fat extracted by ether. The carbohydrate content of the sample was calculated as follows, Carbohydrate content (%) = 100 –[Crude protein (%, DM) + Crude fat (%, DM) + Crude ash], where DM represents dry matter.

Molecular weight determination

The molecular weight distribution of CPI was analyzed by a modified sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) as described previously [21]. Briefly, the samples were dissolved in 8 M urea solution and stirred for 30 min at 25°C, followed by centrifugation at 3200g for 20 min. An aliquot of the supernatant was added to a 5× sample buffer containing 62.5 mM β-mercaptoethanol, 10% SDS, and 0.1% bromophenol blue. The proteins were denatured at 95°C for 4 min, followed by the electrophoresis of 4 μL of protein ladder (12–160 kDa) and 10 μL of the denatured sample, and separated by 10% Tris-Glycine gel. After the electrophoresis, the gel was stained with 0.05% Coomassie Brilliant Blue and destained with a destaining solution (acetic acid: methanol: deionized water = 2: 5: 5).

MALDI-TOF spectral analysis was done for the water-soluble fraction of the CPI after trypsin digestion of CPI at 37°C for overnight using a Mass Spectrometer (Bruker Autoflex TOF/TOF, Bruker, Germany) within 1000–6000 m/z resolution.

Chemical composition and morphological analysis

The Perkin Elmer FTIR analyzer (Frontier, Perkin Elmer, UK) was applied to evaluate the functional groups present in the sample in a transmitted mode in the wavenumber range of 4000–1000 cm-1 with a resolution of 4 cm-1. The morphology of the sample was monitored by high-resolution field emission-scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) (S-4800, Tokyo, Japan).

DPPH assay

The radical scavenging activity was determined by the DPPH assay. Briefly, different CPI concentrations (0.25%, 0.5%, 1% and 2%) were prepared in 0.4 mM DPPH solution. The mixture was incubated for 30 min in dark conditions at RT. The ascorbate solutions (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2%) were also prepared for reference. The optical density (OD) was recorded at 517 nm using a spectrophotometer (Infinite® M Nano 200 Pro; TECAN, Switzerland). The OD values were plotted to compare the DPPH scavenging activity of the CPI with respect to the equivalent concentration of ascorbate.

Cell culture

The hBMSCs were received from the Korean Cell Line Bank (KCLB, Seoul, Republic of Korea) and cultured as previously reported [22,23]. The cell culture was carried out using DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS and 1% antibiotics containing penicillin (10,000 units/mL), streptomycin (10,000 μg/mL), and amphotericin B (25 μg/mL) at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 (Steri-Cycle 370 Incubator; Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA). The old media were changed with fresh media every three days during the experiment. After 70–80% confluency, the hBMSCs were treated with different concentrations of CPI for the desired periods. Passage 5 cells were used in this study. For osteogenic induction, the cells were cultured in an osteogenic induction media containing DMEM supplemented with 50 μg/mL L-ascorbic acid, 10 mM β-glycerophosphate, and 100 nM dexamethasone.

Cell viability assay

The hBMSCs (1 × 104 cells/100 μL media) were seeded into a 96-well plate and incubated with 0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2% CPI at 37°C with 5% CO2 for the chosen periods (1, 3, and 5 days) after 70–80% of confluency. The media without the treatment were considered as control. The cell viability was analyzed using WST-1 assay (EZ-Cytox Cell Viability Assay Kit®). After the treatment, 10 μL of the WST-1 dye was added and further incubated for 2 h. The produced formazan was quantitated by measuring the absorbance at 450 nm (625 nm as a reference value). All the experiments were accomplished in triplicate, and data are presented as mean ODs ± standard deviations. Statistical significance was considered at p* < 0.05.

Live-dead assay

For this, the hBMSCs (4 × 104 cells/100 μL media) were cultured in a 4-well plate at 37°C with 5% CO2, followed by 2% CPI treatment after 70–80% of confluency. The cells grown in DMEM alone were taken as control. The cells were washed with 1× PBS, followed by treatment with 1μL of acridine orange and ethidium bromide dye solution at a ratio of 1:1. The images were captured immediately on appropriate filter channels using Leica Microsystems Suite X software (Leica Microsystems, Germany) of the inverted fluorescence microscope (DMi8 Series, Leica Microsystems, Germany). The survivability of the CPI treated cells was quantified using the live-dead fluorescence imaging after 3 days of incubation.

Colony formation and morphological analysis

The colony formation efficiency and morphology of hBMSCs in the presence of CPI was investigated using (1) Giemsa staining, (2) bright-field microscopy, and (3) fluorescence microscopy.

For Giemsa staining, hBMSCs (4 × 104 cells/100μL media) were cultured in the presence of different concentrations of CPI and incubated for 3 days. After 80% confluency, the cells were washed with PBS. The washed cells were fixed with 3.7% PFA at RT. The media without treatment and gelatin were considered as negative and positive control, respectively. The fixed cells were washed with PBS and permeabilized with 100% methanol for 20 min. The permeabilized cells were further washed with PBS and incubated for 10 min with Giemsa stain. The excess stain was removed by washing with PBS, and images were captured at the magnification of 5× under an optical microscope (Zeiss Optical Microscope, USA).

The arrangement of F-actin was studied through fluorescence imaging to visualize the effect of 2% CPI on the cell cytoskeleton. The hBMSCs (2 × 104 cells/100 μL media) were cultured in 60 mm bottom well plates and treated with 2% CPI for 3 days. The media without the CPI was taken as control. The staining of cells was performed as described earlier with some modifications [23]. Briefly, the cells were washed with PBS and fixed with 3.7% paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 15 min at room temperature, followed by the addition of 0.1% Triton X-100 to permeabilize the cells for 10 min at RT. The cells were rinsed twice with PBS buffer and blocked for 1 h with 1% BSA. The permeabilized cells were rinsed with PBS and then incubated for 30 min with 200 μL Alexa Fluor (AF) 488 F-actin probe (ex/em = 488/518) to visualize the F-actin. The nuclear staining was done with the addition of 20 μL of 1 mg/mL DAPI solution for 2 min in the dark. The stained cells were rinsed and covered with a mounting medium and a glass coverslip. The fluorescence images were taken with a fluorescence microscope at a magnification of 40×. The ROI intensity of the images was quantified using ImageJ software (ImageJ v1.8, NIH Lab., USA, www.imagej.nih.gov).

Mineralization study

The effect of CPI on the mineralization of hBMSCs was evaluated by the ARS procedure after 7, 14, and 21 days of treatment. The used media were replaced with fresh media every 3 days. The cultured cells were rinsed with PBS. The cells were fixed and permeabilized with 1 mL of 70% absolute ice-cold ethanol for 15 min at RT. The permeabilized cells were stained with 500 μL of 40 mM ARS (pH 4.2) stain for 10 min, followed by washing with deionized water to remove the excess stain. The mineralization was documented using the optical microscope. The mineral quantification was estimated by dissolving the formed mineral in 500 μL destaining solution (10% cetyl pyridinium chloride and 10 mM sodium phosphate). The absorbance of the solution was taken at 562 nm using a spectrophotometer. All the samples were prepared in triplicate, and data are presented as mean ODs ± standard deviations. Statistical significance was considered at p* < 0.05.

ALP activity

The ALP activity of CPI-treated hBMSCs was evaluated by immunohistochemical (IHC) staining methods as described previously [24]. The cells were fixed with 3.7% paraformaldehyde (PFA) for 30 min at RT, followed by permeabilization with 0.1% Triton X-100 for 5 min. The fixed and permeabilized cells were blocked with 1% BSA for 1h, followed by incubation with mouse monoclonal antibody against ALP. After that, the cells were washed twice by PBS and reacted with 30 μL of DUB substrate kit (ab64238, Abcam, USA) and incubated for 10–15 min at RT. Next, the plates were rinsed twice with PBS and reacted with 5 μL of 30% H2O2 to block endogenous peroxidase activity. The reaction proceeded until the desired color was achieved. Finally, the plates were washed twice with PBS and counterstained with hematoxylin stain (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) and visualized by an inverted optical microscope. Images were captured with 20× magnification and compared with control groups. A score of 0 (negative), 2–3 (mild), 4–8 (moderate), and 9–12 (strongly positive) was assigned to the semiquantitative evaluation of the IHC reaction for control and CPI-treated groups. The final IHC score was represented in terms of a 0–12 score.

RNA isolation and real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) analysis

The expression of the osteogenic-marker genes in CPI treated and control cells were evaluated by the qRT-PCR technique. Briefly, the cells (4 × 104 cells/100μL media) were cultured in a 24-well plate in the osteogenic induction media for 7 and 14 days, followed by the extraction of RNA by TRIzol® reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The purity and concentration of the extracted RNA were evaluated by a spectrophotometer. The cDNA was synthesized from 2 μg of RNA by using reverse transcriptase and SYBR Green Master mix. The mRNA expression was quantified with a Bio-Rad Real-Time PCR (CFX96TM Maestro Real-Time System, Bio-Rad, USA). The reaction condition included 43 cycles of denaturation for 15 sec at 95°C and 1 min amplification at 60°C. All the experiments were performed in triplicate and normalized to the housekeeping gene β-actin. The relative mRNA expression from hBMSCs in the presence of CPI and control was compared in a histogram. All the samples were prepared in triplicate during the experiments. The specific gene primers used for qRT-PCR analysis are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Specified gene primer sequences used in qRT-PCR analysis.

Genes GenBank Accession No. Sequences (5′ to 3′)
β-actin NM_031144 ACCCGCGAGTACAACCTTCT
CTTCTGACCCATACCCACCA
Runx2 NM_001146038 CGCACGACAACCGCACCAT
CAGCACGGAGCACAGGAAGTT
OSX NM_001300837 TGCTTGAGGAGGAAGTTCAC
AGGTCACTGCCCACAGAGTA
ALP NM_007431 CCAACTCTTTTGTGCCAGAGA
GGCTACATTGGTGTTGAGCTTTT
BSP L09555 AACTTTTATGTCCCCCGTTGA
TGGACTGGAAACCGTTTCAGA
OCN AL135927 TGAGAGCCCTCACACTCCTC
ACCTTTGCTGGACTCTGCAC
OPN J04765 TGAAACGAGTCAGCTGGATG
TGAAATTCATGGCTGTGGAA
COL1 NM007742 GCTCCTCTTAGGGGCCACT
CCACGTCTCACCATTGGGG

Abbreviations: β-actin; Actin beta, Runx2; Runt-related transcription factor-x2, OSX; Osterix, ALP; Alkaline phosphatase, BSP; Bone sialoprotein, OCN; Osteocalcin, OPN; Osteopontin, and COL1; Collagen type-1.

Immunocytochemical staining

The expression of the osteogenic marker proteins was studied through immunocytochemical staining procedure. The hBMSCs (4 × 104 cells/100 μL media) were cultured in 60 mm bottom well plates and treated with 2% CPI for 7 and 14 days. The media without the CPI was taken as control. The staining of cells was performed by washing with PBS, followed by fixing with 3.7% PFA for 15 min at RT. Next, the cells were permeabilized by the addition of 0.1% Triton X-100 for 10 min at RT. After that, the cells were rinsed twice with PBS, blocked by 1% BSA, and incubated with 250 μL of mouse monoclonal antibodies against Runx2, ALP, OCN, and OPN. The specific antibody dilutions are listed in S1 Table. The nucleus was counterstained with 20 μL of 1 mg/mL DAPI solution for 2 min in the dark. The stained cells were rinsed and covered with a mounting medium and a glass coverslip. The fluorescence images were taken with a fluorescence microscope at a magnification of 40×. The mean fluorescence intensity of the images was quantified using ImageJ software (ImageJ v1.8, NIH Lab., USA, www.imagej.nih.gov).

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using OriginPro 9.0 software. Statistical significance between the control and treatment groups was determined using one-way ANOVA. All the data are presented as mean ± SDs. Differences were considered significant at * p < 0.05.

Results

Nutritional composition

The nutritional composition of the CPI was determined, and the values are presented in Table 2. The obtained data indicate that the extracted material was enriched in protein content (~ 90.91%). The carbohydrate, ash, and fat content were negligible.

Table 2. Composition (g/100g) of Gryllus bimaculatus protein isolate (mean ± S.D., n = 3).

Sample Crude protein (%, DM) Crude fat (% DM) Crude ash (%, DM) Carbohydrate* (%, DM)
Cricket protein isolate 90.91±0.36a 0.46±0.10a 3.67±0.25a 4.96

Different letters in each column show significant difference (p < 0.05) between means. *Carbohydrate (%): 100 –crude protein–crude fat–crude ash. DM; dry matter.

The total amino acid amounts in CPI were determined using the Kjeldahl method and are listed in Table 3.

Table 3. Amino acid composition (g/100 g sample) for the protein isolate of G. bimaculatus.

Essential amino acids Contents (g/100g sample) Non-essential Amino acid Contents (g/100g sample)
Isoleucine 3.89 Aspartic acid 8.44
Leucine 6.40 Serine 4.15
Lysine 5.02 Glutamic acid 9.15
Methionine 1.24 Proline 3.58
Phenylalanine 3.60 Glycine 3.34
Tyrosine 3.81 Alanine 4.03
Threonine 3.56 Cysteine 1.00
Valine 4.27 Arginine 5.32
Histidine 1.72 Non-essential A.A 39.02
Tryptophan 1.06
Essential A.A 30.68

The total amount of amino acids in the isolate was 69.70 g/100 g of sample. The data showed that the CPI contained 30.68% of essential and 39.02% of non-essential amino acids. Leucine was the most commonly found essential amino acid (6.40 g/100 g of sample), followed by lysine and valine (5.02 and 4.27 g/100 g of sample, respectively). Among the non-essential amino acids, glutamic acid (9.15 g/100 g of sample) and aspartic acid (8.44 g/100 g of sample), per 100g CPI, were the most abundant.

Molecular weight analysis

SDS-PAGE analysis was performed to determine the molecular weight of the proteins present in the CPI, and the results are shown in Fig 2A. Lane 1 indicates the protein ladder, ranging from 12 to 160 kDa, while lane 2 shows the CPI protein composition, including six prominent protein bands and a smear of several other faint bands. The protein band intensity profile is shown in Fig 2B. The protein fraction of 126 kDa exhibited the highest band intensity, followed by those corresponding to a molecular weight of 62, 160, 52, 56, and 162 kDa. MALDI-TOF MS was performed to determine the molecular weight of proteins present below the range of 6 kDa, and the corresponding mass spectrum is shown in S1 Fig. Approximately 26 peaks were observed in the mass spectrum, indicating that different kinds of peptides were found in CPI in the range of 6 kDa.

Fig 2. Determination of molecular weight of CPI.

Fig 2

(a) SDS-PAGE analysis of total CPI, (b) SDS-PAGE band intensity profile of total CPI.

FTIR and the morphology of CPI

The FTIR spectrum shows typical protein absorption peaks in the range of 4,000–400 cm-1 [25]. The FTIR spectrum of the CPI is shown in Fig 3A. The appearance of the absorption peaks at 1,635 and 1,517 cm-1 indicates the presence of–C = O (carbonyl) and–N–H (amide II) groups belonging to the β-sheet structure of proteins [26]. The FTIR absorption peak at 3,277 cm-1 indicates the presence of–OH (hydroxyl) or–NH2 (amine) protein groups.

Fig 3. Chemical characterization of CPI.

Fig 3

(a) The FTIR spectrum of the CPI extracted from insect, and (b) FE-SEM morphology of freeze-dried CPI.

The surface topographical features, including the surface pattern and roughness of the material, play a significant role in cell survivability and osteogenic differentiation. The surface morphology of the freeze-dried CPI was analyzed using FE-SEM, and the micrographs are shown in Fig 3B. The CPI exhibited a morphological combination of a rough and smooth layer of flakes, suggesting crystalline structure. However, the surface morphology is profoundly affected by the extraction process and its conditions. Zeta potential measurements were performed to measure the surface potentials of the CPI in water. The colloidal solution exhibited a zeta potential value of -23.2 ± 3.72 mV, indicating that the CPI suspension was electrically stabilized.

Antioxidant activity of the CPI

The antioxidant potential of CPI was determined using a DPPH assay in the presence of different concentrations of CPI, and the results are presented in Fig 4A. A decrease in the absorbance at 517 nm was observed in the CPI-treated conditions compared to the control, showing their scavenging property. This property is highly affected by the CPI concentration, and among the concentrations used (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2%), 2% CPI demonstrated the best scavenging potential as indicated in the digital photographs. A more transparent solution was observed as the concentrations of CPI increased, showing their better scavenging potential. At higher concentrations (2%), the transparency of the CPI solution was similar to that of ascorbate.

Fig 4. Antioxidative property and biocompatibility of CPI.

Fig 4

(a) DPPH scavenging activity of CPI in reference to an equivalent concentration of ascorbate with corresponding digital photographs of the plates (inset). (b) In vitro cytotoxicity evaluation WST-1 assay of CPI-treated hBMSCs. (c) Live/dead assay of 2% CPI-treated hBMSCs after 3 days of incubation (Scale bar: 100 μm). Gelatin-treated plates were considered as positive controls. Data are mean ± SD of triplicated experiments, statistical significance at *p < 0.05.

Cell viability and morphology

The cytotoxicity of the CPI was monitored using a WST-1 assay in the presence of hBMSCs, and the results are presented in Fig 4B. No adverse effects were observed in the CPI-treated groups, showing their biocompatibility. However, it was interesting to see that the CPI concentrations significantly altered the cell viability, and 2% CPI-treated media resulted in a higher cell viability after 5 days of treatment, indicating a suitable dose for cellular activity. The live-dead assay in the presence of 2% CPI after 3 days of incubation is shown in Fig 4C. The mean fluorescence intensities are given in S2 Fig. The number of cells that adhered to the substrate was estimated by counting the number of nuclei. Cell death (%) was significantly lower in the CPI-treated group than in the control group, further showing the greater biocompatibility of CPI-treated media.

The colony formation efficiency of hBMSCs in the presence of CPI was monitored using Giemsa staining after 3 days of incubation, and images are shown in Fig 5A. The media without CPI and with gelatin were considered as negative and positive controls, respectively. A similar colony formation pattern was observed in the CPI-treated group and in the control group, showing the biocompatibility of CPI-treated media. The cytoskeletal and nuclear morphology of hBMSCs in the presence of CPI was determined using bright-field and fluorescence staining, and the results are shown in S3 Fig. and Fig 5B. Media without CPI were used as a control. It is interesting to note that the crude CPI aggregated on the surface of cells favoring their growth, as imaged by bright-field microscopy. The actin and nuclear morphology of hBMSCs were comparable in CPI treatment and the control conditions, showing no noticeable cytoskeletal or nuclear damage in CPI-treated cells. The fluorescence intensity profiles of hBMSCs in both conditions are shown in S4 Fig.

Fig 5. In vitro cytotoxicity evaluation of CPI on hBMSCs after 3 days of incubation.

Fig 5

(a) Colony formation efficiency of hBMSCs using Giemsa staining (Mag. ×5) (b) Fluorescence microscopy images of F-actin. The white arrows indicate the presence of stained CPI on the surface of hBMSCs (Scale bar: 100 μm).

Osteogenic differentiation

The mineralization potential of hBMSCs in the presence of CPI was determined using ARS staining procedures after 7, 14, and 21 days of the treatment, and the results are shown in Fig 6A. An increased mineralization was observed in CPI-treated cells compared with the control, after 7 days of treatment, indicating their mineralization potential. Notably, this trend was further increased after 14 and 21 days of treatment. It is interesting to note that the mineralization potential was strongly affected by the concentration of CPI in the media, and among the concentrations tested (0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2%), 2% CPI exhibited the best mineral deposition potential. The quantitative values of the mineralization are shown in Fig 6B. The higher quantitative values confirm the superior mineralization potential of CPI.

Fig 6. Evaluation of in vitro osteoblast differentiation in the presence of CPI.

Fig 6

(a) ARS staining of CPI-treated hBMSCs after 7 and 14 days of incubation, and (b) corresponding quantitative values at indicated time intervals. Data are mean ± SD of triplicated experiments, statistical significance at *p<0.05. The black arrow indicates the presence of stained CPI on the surface of hBMSCs.

The ALP activity in the presence of CPI was evaluated by IHC following 7, 14, and 21 days of treatment and is represented in Fig 7A. Scores describing the changes in IHC parameters (percentage of positive cells and staining intensity) is given in Fig 7B. The results indicate an increase in the IHC score for the CPI-treated group, meaning that CPI-treated cells exhibited a strongly positive reaction for ALP after 14 and 21 days of incubation. However, a lower expression profile was noticed in control samples than CPI-treated groups suggesting that ALP expression was profoundly affected by CPI-treatment.

Fig 7. ALP activity in the presence of CPI.

Fig 7

(a) Representative immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for alkaline phosphatase (ALP) on hBMSCs in control and CPI-treated medium at indicated time intervals. Positive staining is indicated by red-brown cytoplasm followed by hematoxylin counter staining of nucleus. Asterisks with ‘*’ indicates mild reaction, ‘**’ indicates moderate reaction, and ‘***’ indicates intense reaction, (b) their corresponding IHC scores. Statistical significance at *p < 0.05.

Osteoblast-specific gene and protein marker expression

The expression of osteogenic marker genes (Runx2, OSX, ALP, BSP, OCN, OPN, and COL1) in hBMSCs in the presence of 2% CPI and the control after 7 and 14 days of treatment are shown in Fig 8. The expression of the early gene marker, Runx2, was found significantly higher compared to the control after 14 days of incubation as shown in Fig 8A. Besides, the ALP expression was significantly increased following CPI treatment, as indicated in Fig 8B and 8C. This observation is also supported by the IHC analysis of ALP. In contrast, the expression of OSX was decreased after CPI treatment. Interestingly, the expression of BSP and OCN was also found higher after 14 days of incubation, as shown in Fig 8D & 8E. A consistent expression of OPN and COL1 was observed after 7 and 14 days of CPI treatment Fig 8F & 8G.

Fig 8. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis of 2% CPI-treated hBMSCs after 7 days and 14 days of incubation.

Fig 8

(a) Runx2, (b) OSX, (c) ALP, (d) BSP, (e) OCN, (f) OPN, (g) COL1. Data are mean ± SD of triplicated experiments, statistical significance at *p < 0.05.

The protein expression of Runx2, ALP, OCN, and OPN is shown in Fig 9A. The mean fluorescence intensities for each protein are represented in Fig 9B. It was observed that the respective proteins were equally expressed in both controls and CPI-treated cells after 7 and 14 days of treatment; however, no significant differences (*p < 0.05) were noted in the expression of Runx2, OCN, and OPN, suggesting that CPI-treatment does not alter their expression even after 14 days of incubation. Besides, ALP expression in CPI-treated cells was significantly higher (**p < 0.01) compared to the control groups.

Fig 9. Osteoblast-specific protein markers expression of CPI treated hBMSCs at indicated time intervals.

Fig 9

(a) Fluorescence microscopy images of respective protein markers (scale bar: 100 μm), and (b) corresponding fluorescence intensities. Data are mean ± SD of triplicated experiments, statistical significance at *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01, respectively. White arrow indicates the presence of CPI on to the surface of hBMSCs.

Discussion

The present study aimed to investigate the osteoinductive potential of a protein isolate extracted from field crickets (Gryllus bimaculatus) on the osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs under in-vitro conditions. Since crickets are edible insects [27], their nutritional value is well known [28]; however, they have not been explored thoroughly for their tissue engineering applications. Our results show a successful extraction of ~ 90% of CPI from dried cricket samples, which is substantially higher than a few commercially available cricket-derived protein isolates (~ 45%– 70%) [29,30]. The abundance of glutamic acid in our extracted CPI (9.15 g/100 g sample) is expected to be a crucial factor for promoting osteogenesis. Glutamine has long been recognized as a vital amino acid for stem cell differentiation into osteoblasts [31] and bone homeostasis [32]. Additionally, the abundance of aspartic acid in CPI (8.44 g/100 g sample) also possibly facilitated the osteogenic differentiation of the cultured cells. Aspartic acid has been shown to promote the osteogenic differentiation of hMSCs compared to glutamic acid [33]. Our results show that the presence of aliphatic amino acids, such as leucine and valine, could also increase osteoblastic differentiation. Thus, the amino acid composition of CPI is a crucial factor in determining its osteoinductiveness.

The FTIR spectroscopy analysis additionally reflects the possible secondary structure of CPI peptides [34]. The abundance of valine, isoleucine, and threonine, along with the FTIR peaks at 1,635 and 1,517 cm-1, are correlated with the possible involvement of β-sheet conformations in the CPI. β-sheet-rich polypeptides are known to mimic the extracellular matrices for stem cell culture [35].

Despite the presence of essential amino acids and β-sheet-rich polypeptides in crude CPI, we have noted the existence of insoluble CPI fragments deposited on hBMSCs, indicating their incomplete solubility at a physiological pH. Moreover, the size and colloidal stability of the CPI were observed to determine the suitable treatment concentration (a maximum of 2% CPI in our experiment), which is mostly determined based on the isoelectric point of the CPI (pH 4.0). At a physiological pH, ~ 70% CPI solubility has been reported previously [36].

Furthermore, our experimental results also demonstrated that CPI has a comparable antioxidant capacity to that of ascorbate. The concentration-dependent scavenging potential of CPI is attributed to numerous factors, including the amino acid composition, the presence of different functional groups in their structure, and the presence of lower molecular weight peptide fractions in the CPI [37]. Low molecular weight peptides (≤3 kDa) have been reported to show an enhanced antioxidant activity compared to larger peptides [38]. The MALDI-TOF MS spectrum of the CPI revealed a wide range of low molecular weight (below 6 kDa) peptides, which might have contributed to the reducing ability of the CPI. Hydrophobic amino acids and negatively charged amino acids (Glu and Asp) are well reported to be potential scavengers of free radicals [39,40], which explains the scavenging properties of the CPI. Additionally, the functional groups present in the antioxidants [41] also play a crucial role in determining its antioxidative property. The presence of a–C = O (carbonyl) group, as indicated by the FTIR peak at 1,635 cm-1 of the CPI, is correlated with its antioxidative properties.

We investigated the possible cytotoxicity of CPI before determining its osteoinductive potential. We observed that the extracted CPI was highly biocompatible, as evidenced by an increased viability, a reduced cell death, an unaltered colony formation pattern, and the absence of apparent cytoskeletal/nuclear morphological damage in hBMSCs upon CPI treatment. Biocompatibility is also greatly determined by the surface morphology of the treated material [42]. The surface morphology of the undissolved CPI fraction supported cell survivability up to a 2% CPI concentration.

Next, we investigated the osteoinductive potential of CPI. We observed higher mineralization in the CPI treated group, which is also supported by the IHC scores of ALP expression. Additionally, we observed an increase in the expression of Runx2 and BSP up to 14 days of CPI treatment. An increased expression of Runx2, ALP, BSP, and OCN and a decreased expression of OSX after 14 days of CPI treatment indicate a dynamic control of gene expression promoting osteogenic differentiation. The protein expression of Runx2, ALP, OCN, and OPN showed similar results, as evidenced by the comparable fluorescence intensities in our experiment.

Collectively, we report the successful extraction of ~ 90% of CPI from two-spotted crickets and investigated its osteoinductive properties on hBMSCs. The extracted cricket protein isolate (CPI) in our study most likely exhibited a β-sheet confirmation. The nutritional composition showed an abundance of essential amino acids in the CPI. The presence of a wide range of peptides in the CPI, as indicated by their molecular weights, reflects their possible combined role in determining stem cell fate. Notably, higher cell viability was observed in CPI-treated hBMSCs than in the control cells, showing the excellent biocompatibility of CPI. CPI also exhibited an enhanced antioxidant potential compared to the control. As evident from the ARS staining results, the increased mineralization is correlated with an increase in the Runx2, ALP, and BSP gene expression, confirming the osteoinductive property of CPI. Hence, the cricket-derived protein isolate is a suitable protein isolate for the osteogenic induction of hBMSCs. CPI is also a potential protein isolate that can be used as a precursor for the fabrication of scaffolds for bone regeneration. CPI can also serve as a cost-effective source of protein supplements for osteogenic differentiation. However, some aspects of this process are still under investigation. The extent to which the extraction method determined the CPI structural and functional features is unclear. In addition, the potential of CPI to trigger multilineage differentiation is yet to be studied.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. MALDI TOF MS spectra of CPI for the determination of molecular weight of peptides below 6kDa.

(DOCX)

S2 Fig. Cell death percentage in control and 2% CPI.

(DOCX)

S3 Fig. Representative bright-field images of CPI-treated hBMSCs at indicated time intervals (Magnification ×20).

Arrowhead indicates the presence of CPI aggregates deposited on the surface of cells.

(DOCX)

S4 Fig

ROI intensity profile of (a) control and (b) 2% CPI.

(DOCX)

S1 Table. List of antibodies used for immunofluorescence staining.

(DOCX)

S1 Raw images

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

Authors would like to thank the Central Laboratory of Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea, for providing SEM image, FTIR data, and MALDI TOF MS spectra.

Data Availability

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

Funding Statement

K.T.L: 'National Research Foundation of Korea' (NRF) funded by the 'Ministry of Education' (NRF-2018R1A6A1A03025582 & NRF- 2019R1D1A3A03103828) S.J.C: Innovative Cultured Meat Technology Development Alchemist Project (20012439) funded by the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MoTIE, South Korea) The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Akkawi I, Zmerly H. Osteoporosis: current concepts. Joints. 2018;6(2):122. 10.1055/s-0038-1660790 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Roberts TT, Rosenbaum AJ. Bone grafts, bone substitutes and orthobiologics: the bridge between basic science and clinical advancements in fracture healing. Organogenesis. 2012;8(4):114–24. 10.4161/org.23306 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bharadwaz A, Jayasuriya AC. Recent trends in the application of widely used natural and synthetic polymer nanocomposites in bone tissue regeneration. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2020:110698. 10.1016/j.msec.2020.110698 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chen R, Wang J, Liu C. Biomaterials act as enhancers of growth factors in bone regeneration. Advanced Functional Materials. 2016;26(48):8810–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Nauth A, Ristevski B, Li R, Schemitsch EH. Growth factors and bone regeneration: how much bone can we expect? Injury. 2011;42(6):574–9. 10.1016/j.injury.2011.03.034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Dong Y, Sun X, Zhang Z, Liu Y, Zhang L, Zhang X, et al. Regional and sustained dual-release of growth factors from biomimetic tri-layered scaffolds for the repair of large-scale osteochondral defects. Applied Materials Today. 2020;19:100548. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Devescovi V, Leonardi E, Ciapetti G, Cenni E. Growth factors in bone repair. La Chirurgia degli organi di movimento. 2008;92(3):161–8. 10.1007/s12306-008-0064-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Vilcinskas A, Gross J. Drugs from bugs: the use of insects as a valuable source of transgenes with potential in modern plant protection strategies. Journal of Pest Science. 2005;78(4):187–91. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Pemberton RW. Insects and other arthropods used as drugs in Korean traditional medicine. Journal of ethnopharmacology. 1999;65(3):207–16. 10.1016/s0378-8741(98)00209-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Oggu GS, Velidandla S, Ealla KKR, Venkatesan J, Asthana A, Kim SK, et al. Marine Biomaterial Treasure and Biomedical Sciences. Encyclopedia of Marine Biotechnology. 2020;2:1209–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Yu SH, Yu S-Y, Lee B-S, Kim H-J, Kim M-R, Lee Y-C. 28-day repeated oral dose toxicity study of an aqueous extract of Gryllus bimaculatus in sprague-dawley rat. Toxicology Reports. 2020. 10.1016/j.toxrep.2020.04.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kim S-H, Kim Y, Han J-S. Antioxidant Activities and Nutritional Components of Cricket (Gryllus bimaculatus) Powder and Protein Extract. Asian Journal of Beauty and Cosmetology. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Chevallier N, Anagnostou F, Zilber S, Bodivit G, Maurin S, Barrault A, et al. Osteoblastic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells with platelet lysate. Biomaterials. 2010;31(2):270–8. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.09.043 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Mackay AM, Beck SC, Murphy JM, Barry FP, Chichester CO, Pittenger MF. Chondrogenic differentiation of cultured human mesenchymal stem cells from marrow. Tissue engineering. 1998;4(4):415–28. 10.1089/ten.1998.4.415 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Shim WS, Jiang S, Wong P, Tan J, Chua YL, Tan YS, et al. Ex vivo differentiation of human adult bone marrow stem cells into cardiomyocyte-like cells. Biochemical and biophysical research communications. 2004;324(2):481–8. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.09.087 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Chiellini C, Cochet O, Negroni L, Samson M, Poggi M, Ailhaud G, et al. Characterization of human mesenchymal stem cell secretome at early steps of adipocyte and osteoblast differentiation. BMC molecular biology. 2008;9(1):26. 10.1186/1471-2199-9-26 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Charbord P. Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells: historical overview and concepts. Human gene therapy. 2010;21(9):1045–56. 10.1089/hum.2010.115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Raggatt LJ, Partridge NC. Cellular and molecular mechanisms of bone remodeling. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2010;285(33):25103–8. 10.1074/jbc.R109.041087 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Choi BD, Wong NA, Auh J-H. Defatting and sonication enhances protein extraction from edible insects. Korean journal for food science of animal resources. 2017;37(6):955. 10.5851/kosfa.2017.37.6.955 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.AOAC CP. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 5th Revision. Maryland: AOAC International; 1999. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bußler S, Rumpold BA, Jander E, Rawel HM, Schlüter OK. Recovery and techno-functionality of flours and proteins from two edible insect species: Meal worm (Tenebrio molitor) and black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae. Heliyon. 2016;2(12):e00218. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2016.e00218 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Dutta SD, Patel DK, Seo Y-R, Park C-W, Lee S-H, Kim J-W, et al. In Vitro Biocompatibility of Electrospun Poly (ε-Caprolactone)/Cellulose Nanocrystals-Nanofibers for Tissue Engineering. Journal of Nanomaterials. 2019;2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Patel DK, Dutta SD, Hexiu J, Ganguly K, Lim K-T. Bioactive electrospun nanocomposite scaffolds of poly (lactic acid)/cellulose nanocrystals for bone tissue engineering. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2020;162:1429–41. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.07.246 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Fedchenko N, Reifenrath J. Different approaches for interpretation and reporting of immunohistochemistry analysis results in the bone tissue–a review. Diagnostic pathology. 2014;9(1):1–12. 10.1186/s13000-014-0221-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Nandiyanto ABD, Oktiani R, Ragadhita R. How to read and interpret FTIR spectroscope of organic material. Indonesian Journal of Science and Technology. 2019;4(1):97–118. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Jackson M, Mantsch HH. The use and misuse of FTIR spectroscopy in the determination of protein structure. Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology. 1995;30(2):95–120. 10.3109/10409239509085140 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Ghosh S, Lee S-M, Jung C, Meyer-Rochow V. Nutritional composition of five commercial edible insects in South Korea. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology. 2017;20(2):686–94. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Udomsil N, Imsoonthornruksa S, Gosalawit C, Ketudat-Cairns M. Nutritional Values and Functional Properties of House Cricket (Acheta domesticus) and Field Cricket (Gryllus bimaculatus). Food Science and Technology Research. 2019;25(4):597–605. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Montowska M, Kowalczewski PŁ, Rybicka I, Fornal E. Nutritional value, protein and peptide composition of edible cricket powders. Food chemistry. 2019;289:130–8. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.03.062 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Amarender RV, Bhargava K, Dossey AT, Gamagedara S. Lipid and protein extraction from edible insects–Crickets (Gryllidae). LWT. 2020:109222. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Yu Y, Newman H, Shen L, Sharma D, Hu G, Mirando AJ, et al. Glutamine metabolism regulates proliferation and lineage allocation in skeletal stem cells. Cell metabolism. 2019;29(4):966–78. e4. 10.1016/j.cmet.2019.01.016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Huang Y-C, Li Z, Li J, Lyu F-J. Interaction between Stem Cells and the Microenvironment for Musculoskeletal Repair. Hindawi; 2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Onak G, Şen M, Horzum N, Ercan UK, Yaralı ZB, Garipcan B, et al. Aspartic and Glutamic Acid Templated Peptides Conjugation on Plasma Modified Nanofibers for Osteogenic Differentiation of Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells: A Comparative Study. Scientific reports. 2018;8(1):1–15. 10.1038/s41598-017-17765-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Otaki JM, Tsutsumi M, Gotoh T, Yamamoto H. Secondary structure characterization based on amino acid composition and availability in proteins. Journal of chemical information and modeling. 2010;50(4):690–700. 10.1021/ci900452z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Collier JH, Rudra JS, Gasiorowski JZ, Jung JP. Multi-component extracellular matrices based on peptide self-assembly. Chemical Society Reviews. 2010;39(9):3413–24. 10.1039/b914337h [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Hirsch A, Cho Y-H, Kim YHB, Jones OG. Contributions of protein and milled chitin extracted from domestic cricket powder to emulsion stabilization. Current Research in Food Science. 2019;1:17–23. 10.1016/j.crfs.2019.09.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Nwachukwu ID, Aluko RE. Structural and functional properties of food protein‐derived antioxidant peptides. Journal of Food Biochemistry. 2019;43(1):e12761. 10.1111/jfbc.12761 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Yang R, Li X, Lin S, Zhang Z, Chen F. Identification of novel peptides from 3 to 10 kDa pine nut (Pinus koraiensis) meal protein, with an exploration of the relationship between their antioxidant activities and secondary structure. Food chemistry. 2017;219:311–20. 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.09.163 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.He R, Ju X, Yuan J, Wang L, Girgih AT, Aluko RE. Antioxidant activities of rapeseed peptides produced by solid state fermentation. Food Research International. 2012;49(1):432–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Zou T-B, He T-P, Li H-B, Tang H-W, Xia E-Q. The structure-activity relationship of the antioxidant peptides from natural proteins. Molecules. 2016;21(1):72. 10.3390/molecules21010072 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Chen J, Yang J, Ma L, Li J, Shahzad N, Kim CK. Structure-antioxidant activity relationship of methoxy, phenolic hydroxyl, and carboxylic acid groups of phenolic acids. Scientific reports. 2020;10(1):1–9. 10.1038/s41598-019-56847-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Lutolf MP, Gilbert PM, Blau HM. Designing materials to direct stem-cell fate. Nature. 2009;462(7272):433–41. 10.1038/nature08602 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Gianpaolo Papaccio

5 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-38399

Naturally-derived protein biomaterials from Gryllus bimaculatus for improved antioxidant and stem cell differentiation

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Lim,

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.

Although of some interest, this manuscript and study needs to be considerably improved since the Title.

The pitfalls are numerous and include some methodological mistakes.

The Authors must follow all the criticisms raised by the two referees and amend the manuscript as requested.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 19 2021 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,

Gianpaolo Papaccio, M.D., Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files.

3. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

[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: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

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: No

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: The authors aimed to investigate the effects of CPI on the osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs.

The manuscript is interesting, but there are some points that must be clarified.

I suggest to improve the title. First of all, it is badly written in English. I suggest to use the word biopolymer instead of biomaterial. Biopolymers are polymers produced by living organisms. Cellulose, proteins, peptides, are all examples of biopolymers used in tissue engineering. For example, I suggest a possible title as following: "Naturally derived proteins extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs".

In figure 5a, the authors must report what the arrows indicate in the pictures.

The osteogenic differentiation must be evaluated also at 21 days .

The immunofluorescence showed in figure 8 (in particular for 2%CPI) is very bad. Dye deposits are detectable and the staining is aspecific. The Authors indicate these deposits as presence of CPI on surface of hBMSCs. How can the authors confirm this? If this is, it means that the CPI is not soluble. Incomplete solubility makes CPI difficult to use. Please, clarify better this point.

ALP must be performed using histological staining.

Moreover, the Authors stated that: “no significant difference was noted in the mean intensities among the control, and the CPI treated cells”.

In figure 8, the statistic is indicated using asterisks. This point must be clarified and reported in Results.

The Discussion must be revised, it is too long and dispersive.

Reviewer #2: 518 / 5000

Risultati della traduzione

Although the study was previously not sufficiently suitable for publication on Plos One, the experiments carried out by the authors following the suggestions of the reviewers, have significantly improved the paper.

Despite this, some concerns need to be addressed.

First of all, the title should be rewritten: it should be improved grammatically, with a verb that would make the meaning of the paper clearer.

Osteogenesis should also be evaluated at 21 days.

The discussion needs to be shortened.

**********

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: No

[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. 2021 Jun 2;16(6):e0249291. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249291.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 0


26 Feb 2021

Response to Reviewers:

Reviewer 1:

The authors aimed to investigate the effects of CPI on the osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs. The manuscript is interesting, but there are some points that must be clarified.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for reviewing our manuscript. We have made the necessary corrections based on your valuable suggestion.

Comment #1. I suggest to improve the title. First of all, it is badly written in English. I suggest to use the word biopolymer instead of biomaterial. Biopolymers are polymers produced by living organisms. Cellulose, proteins, peptides, are all examples of biopolymers used in tissue engineering. For example, I suggest a possible title as following: "Naturally derived proteins extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs".

Author’s response: Thank you for your kind recommendation. We agree with your suggested title and have updated the same in our revised manuscript.

[Naturally-derived protein extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs].

Comment #2. In figure 5a, the authors must report what the arrows indicate in the pictures.

Author’s response: Thank you for your comment. We have indicated the necessary information in the revised manuscript.

[Fig. 5. In vitro cytotoxicity evaluation of CPI on hBMSCs after 3 days of incubation. (a) optical microscopy images after Giemsa staining (b) fluorescence microscopy images of F-actin. The white arrows indicate the presence of stained CPI on the surface of hBMSCs].

Comment #3. The osteogenic differentiation must be evaluated also at 21 days.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have included the hBMSC differentiation using the ARS staining procedure (Fig. 5.) and immunohistochemistry of ALP expression (Fig. 6.) for 7, 14, and 21 days in our revised manuscript.

Comment #4. The immunofluorescence showed in figure 8 (in particular for 2%CPI) is very bad. Dye deposits are detectable and the staining is aspecific. The Authors indicate these deposits as presence of CPI on surface of hBMSCs. How can the authors confirm this? If this is, it means that the CPI is not soluble. Incomplete solubility makes CPI difficult to use. Please, clarify better this point.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for deeply reviewing our manuscript. We agree with your opinion. The CPI used in this study is partially soluble in DMEM at the physiological pH and hence some of the aggregated structure are visible on the surface of the cultured hBMSCs. To confirm the aggregates as CPI, we have taken the bright field images of the cells after desired treatment and is indicated in Supplementary Fig. 3 of the revised manuscript. Thus, the fluorescence microscopy images taken at different time period also indicates the presence of CPI aggregates on the surface of cells as shown in Fig. 8. We completely agree that soluble protein is more convenient for cellular interaction or metabolism. However, the purpose of our study was to check the potential of crude CPI on hBMSCs osteogenic potential at physiological pH. The size and the colloidal stability of the up to 2% CPI at physiological pH was found to favor hBMSCs growth and differentiation. Based on our study, we conclude that the use of up to 2% crude CPI is favorable for hBMSCs growth.

Comment #5. ALP must be performed using histological staining. Moreover, the Authors stated that: “no significant difference was noted in the mean intensities among the control, and the CPI treated cells”.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for your suggestion. We have included the immunohistochemistry staining of ALP after 7, 14, and 21 days of CPI treatment. As the protein expression for ALP was performed using the immunocytochemistry analysis, we could confirm the successful expression of the protein in both the treated and the control cells, indicating the CPI treatment favored the expression of the osteogenic marker proteins similar to control cells.

Comment #6. In figure 8, the statistic is indicated using asterisks. This point must be clarified and reported in Results.

Author’s response: Thank you for your kind information. We have discussed this point in the “Results” section in our revised manuscript.

Comment #7. The Discussion must be revised, it is too long and dispersive.

Author’s response: Thank you for your suggestion. We have updated the discussion in our revised manuscript as per your recommendation. 

Reviewer 2:

Risultati della traduzione

Although the study was previously not sufficiently suitable for publication on Plos One, the experiments carried out by the authors following the suggestions of the reviewers, have significantly improved the paper. Despite this, some concerns need to be addressed.

Comment #1. First of all, the title should be rewritten: it should be improved grammatically, with a verb that would make the meaning of the paper clearer.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for your valuable comment. We have changed the title in the revised manuscript as follows:

[Naturally-derived protein extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs].

Comment #2. Osteogenesis should also be evaluated at 21 days.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for your comment. We have evaluated the osteogenesis through ARS staining procedure for hBMSCs mineralization quantification (Fig. 5.) and ALP expression through immunohistochemistry (Fig. 6.) for 7, 14, and 21 days in the revised manuscript.

Comment #3. The discussion needs to be shortened.

Author’s response: Thank you very much for your kind recommendation. Based on your suggestion, we have shortened the discussion section in the revised manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Gianpaolo Papaccio

16 Mar 2021

Naturally-derived protein extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs

PONE-D-20-38399R1

Dear Dr. Lim,

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,

Gianpaolo Papaccio, M.D., Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

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: (No Response)

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

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: (No Response)

**********

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: (No Response)

**********

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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

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: No

Acceptance letter

Gianpaolo Papaccio

21 May 2021

PONE-D-20-38399R1

Naturally-derived protein extract from Gryllus bimaculatus improves antioxidant properties and promotes osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs

Dear Dr. Lim:

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

Prof. Gianpaolo Papaccio

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 Fig. MALDI TOF MS spectra of CPI for the determination of molecular weight of peptides below 6kDa.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Fig. Cell death percentage in control and 2% CPI.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Fig. Representative bright-field images of CPI-treated hBMSCs at indicated time intervals (Magnification ×20).

    Arrowhead indicates the presence of CPI aggregates deposited on the surface of cells.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Fig

    ROI intensity profile of (a) control and (b) 2% CPI.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Table. List of antibodies used for immunofluorescence staining.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Raw images

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    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