Methods matter: Comparison of techniques used for sea anemone venom extraction

IF 3.6 Q2 TOXICOLOGY Toxicon: X Pub Date : 2025-03-08 DOI:10.1016/j.toxcx.2025.100219
K.L. Kaposi , D.T. Wilson , A. Jones , J.E. Seymour
{"title":"Methods matter: Comparison of techniques used for sea anemone venom extraction","authors":"K.L. Kaposi ,&nbsp;D.T. Wilson ,&nbsp;A. Jones ,&nbsp;J.E. Seymour","doi":"10.1016/j.toxcx.2025.100219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The study of cnidarian (coral, sea anemone, and jellyfish) venom provides important evolutionary and ecological insights and unlocks vast opportunities for biodiscovery of novel compounds. The success of the field is dependent on not only the acquisition of sufficient quantities of venom but also the ability to compare venom between species and studies. To date, no direct comparison of the main techniques used to acquire sea anemone venom has been performed to determine the comparability or validity of these methods to yield venom derived from within cnidarian venom apparatus – cnidae. This study aims to compare the venom extracted from a sea anemone via three common methods: isolated cnidae, electrostimulation, and physical manipulation. Using a range of non-targeted proteomic and mass spectrometric techniques, we showed each method yielded distinct differences in both the composition and abundance of components detected for extraction method. Furthermore, few identified components were shared between each of the extraction methods. These results highlight that different venom collection methods yield vastly different results. While further investigation is required, to validate the source of each of the components from within each sample, we argue that sample collection from isolated cnidae is likely to be the most representative of true venom components.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37124,"journal":{"name":"Toxicon: X","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 100219"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicon: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590171025000062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study of cnidarian (coral, sea anemone, and jellyfish) venom provides important evolutionary and ecological insights and unlocks vast opportunities for biodiscovery of novel compounds. The success of the field is dependent on not only the acquisition of sufficient quantities of venom but also the ability to compare venom between species and studies. To date, no direct comparison of the main techniques used to acquire sea anemone venom has been performed to determine the comparability or validity of these methods to yield venom derived from within cnidarian venom apparatus – cnidae. This study aims to compare the venom extracted from a sea anemone via three common methods: isolated cnidae, electrostimulation, and physical manipulation. Using a range of non-targeted proteomic and mass spectrometric techniques, we showed each method yielded distinct differences in both the composition and abundance of components detected for extraction method. Furthermore, few identified components were shared between each of the extraction methods. These results highlight that different venom collection methods yield vastly different results. While further investigation is required, to validate the source of each of the components from within each sample, we argue that sample collection from isolated cnidae is likely to be the most representative of true venom components.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Toxicon: X
Toxicon: X Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Toxicology
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Epidemiological and geodemographic patterns of scorpionism in Ecuador: A nationwide analysis (2021–2024) Methods matter: Comparison of techniques used for sea anemone venom extraction Oligomer assembly of Bacillus thuringiensis Cyt2Aa2 on lipid membranes reveals a thread-like structure A comparative analysis of toxin gene families across diverse sea anemone species Biochemical characterization of the venom of the Bolivian endemic pit viper Bothrops sanctaecrucis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1