Yang, Fan. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2010. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 111-132). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS --- p.iii / ABSTRACT --- p.iv / TABLE OF CONTENTS --- p.viii / LIST OF FIGURES --- p.xii / LIST OF TABLES --- p.xv / LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS --- p.xvi / Chapter Chatper 1. --- General Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter Chapter 2. --- Literature Review --- p.5 / Chapter 2.1 --- Facts on food allergy --- p.5 / Chapter 2.1.1 --- Food allergy and its prevalence --- p.5 / Chapter 2.1.2 --- Pathogenesis of food allergy --- p.6 / Chapter 2.1.3 --- Clineal disorders caused and diagnosis of food allergy --- p.8 / Chapter 2.2 --- Allergenicity assessment of genetically engineered food --- p.13 / Chapter 2.2.1 --- The structural and sequence homology of proteins as a criterion for food allergenicity assessment --- p.14 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- Digestion stability as a criterion for food allergenicity assessment --- p.15 / Chapter 2.2.3 --- Animal models for Food Allergenicity Assessment --- p.21 / Chapter 2.3 --- The importance of rice and its nutritional facts --- p.27 / Chapter 2.3.1 --- The importance of rice --- p.27 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- Rice nutritional facts and its relationship with malnutrition --- p.28 / Chapter 2.4 --- Food allergenicity research in rice --- p.30 / Chapter 2.5 --- Glutelin overexpression transgenic rice GT3 --- p.33 / Chapter 2.6 --- Recent and future perspectives for treatment of food allergy --- p.36 / Chapter Chapter 3. --- Materials and Methods --- p.39 / Chapter 3.1 --- Rice Seed Protein Extraction --- p.39 / Chapter 3.1.1 --- Rice varieties for protein extraction --- p.39 / Chapter 3.1.2 --- Protein extraction from rice seeds --- p.39 / Chapter 3.1.3 --- Fractionation of major rice seed storage proteins --- p.40 / Chapter 3.1.4. --- Protein quantification --- p.41 / Chapter 3.1.5 --- Tricine SDS-PAGE --- p.42 / Chapter 3.2 --- Simulated Gastric Digestibility Assay --- p.43 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Assay System --- p.43 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Preparation of Simulated Gastric Fluid --- p.43 / Chapter 3.2.3 --- Assay Procedures --- p.44 / Chapter 3.2.4 --- Results Interpretation --- p.44 / Chapter 3.3 --- Construction of Mouse Models --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Mouse strain and reagents used --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Mouse Model I --- p.46 / Chapter 3.3.3 --- Mouse Model II --- p.50 / Chapter 3.3.4 --- Mouse Model III --- p.51 / Chapter 3.4 --- Bioinformatic Analysis of Glutelin Sequence --- p.52 / Chapter 3.5 --- Epitope Mapping of Glutelin --- p.55 / Chapter 3.5.1 --- Bioinformatic Analysis --- p.55 / Chapter 3.5.2 --- Direct and Competitive ELISA --- p.56 / Chapter 3.5.3 --- Western Blot Analysis --- p.57 / Chapter 3.5.4 --- IgE-binding assay --- p.58 / Chapter Chapter 4. --- Results and Discussion --- p.60 / Chapter 4.1 --- Rice Seed Protein Extraction --- p.60 / Chapter 4.1.1 --- Rice Protein Extraction --- p.60 / Chapter 4.1.2 --- Extraction of rice major seed storage protein fractions --- p.62 / Chapter 4.2 --- Simulated Gastric Digestibility Assay --- p.64 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Pepsin Digestibility of total protein from GT3 and WT rice seeds --- p.64 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Pepsin Digestibility of major storage protein fractions in GT3 and WT rice --- p.68 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- Summary of Pepsin Digestibility Assay --- p.74 / Chapter 4.3 --- Mouse Model I --- p.75 / Chapter 4.3.1 --- Protein-specific IgE levels --- p.75 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- Protein-specific IgG1 and IgG2a levels --- p.77 / Chapter 4.3.3 --- Allergic Response Test --- p.79 / Chapter 4.3.4 --- Summary from Mouse Model I --- p.81 / Chapter 4.4 --- Mouse Model II --- p.83 / Chapter 4.4.1 --- Proteins specific IgE levels --- p.84 / Chapter 4.4.2 --- Proteins specific IgG1 and IgG2a levels --- p.85 / Chapter 4.4.3 --- Allergic Response Test --- p.87 / Chapter 4.4.4 --- Summary from Mouse Model II --- p.88 / Chapter 4.5 --- Mouse Model III --- p.90 / Chapter 4.5.1 --- Protein-specific IgE levels --- p.90 / Chapter 4.5.2 --- Proteins specific IgG1 and IgG2a levels --- p.91 / Chapter 4.5.3 --- Allergic Response Test --- p.93 / Chapter 4.5.4 --- Summary from Mouse Model III --- p.93 / Chapter 4.6 --- Potential allergenicity of rice glutelin by bioinformatics and epitope mapping --- p.94 / Chapter 4.6.1 --- Bioinformatic analysis --- p.94 / Chapter 4.6.2 --- ELISA analysis of synthesized epitopes --- p.97 / Chapter 4.6.3 --- Western Blot Analysis --- p.99 / Chapter 4.6.4 --- IgE-binding assay --- p.103 / Chapter Chapter 5. --- Conclusion and Future Perspectives --- p.109 / References --- p.111

Thesis (M.Sc.) - Carleton University, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 137-151). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2006. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 115-119).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2005. / Title from first page of PDF file. Document formatted into pages; contains xiv, 168 p.; also includes graphics (some col.). Includes bibliographical references (p. 161-168). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center

A soja geneticamente modificada tolerante ao herbicida glifosato tem sido a cultura derivada da engenharia genética mais cultivada atualmente no mundo. Como todo alimento GM a soja tem sido alvo de investigação em relação a sua Biossegurança. Novas estratégias têm sido desenvolvidas e aplicadas neste campo de pesquisa, sendo que métodos rápidos e eficientes de análise proteômica têm sido utilizados para avaliação e monitoramento da segurança e inocuidade alimentar, indicando mudanças no perfil protéico entre variedades convencionais e GM. O objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar os mapas protéicos de amostras de soja convencionais e suas derivadas geneticamente modificadas tolerantes ao herbicida glifosato, utilizando técnicas de análise proteômica com ênfase para inocuidade alimentar. Foram utilizadas seis amostras de soja, sendo três convencionais parentais e três derivadas GM, cultivadas entre 2004-2005, em Goiás. O extrato bruto protéico foi submetido à análise por eletroforese unidimensional e bidimensional. A eletroforese 2D, foi realizada utilizando tiras com gradiente de pH de 3-10 e 4-7. As imagens dos mapas protéicos das seis variedades, produzidas em replicatas, foram analisadas pelo software ImageMaster 2D Platinum. O potencial alergênico do extrato protéico bruto foi avaliado para todas as variedades utilizando soro de pacientes alérgicos à soja através de immunoblotting. Nos resultados obtidos observou-se a presença das principais frações protéicas da soja pela eletroforese unidimensional sem alteração significativa entre as amostras parentais e GM, exceto para uma banda de 115 kDa presente nas amostras parentais, mas ausente nas amostras GM. A partir da análise por eletroforese 2D foram identificadas as formas peptídicas correspondentes às frações de β-conglicinina e glicinina bem como diversas outras proteínas encontradas na soja como o inibidor de tripsina e a lipoxigenase. Através do software foi possível observar que um spot apresentou diferença estatística entre as amostras analisadas, expresso em maior concentração nas amostras GM do que nas parentais. Nos testes de alergenicidade, os extratos protéicos das variedades GM demonstraram reatividade similar em relação as suas respectivas variedades parentais. A proteína de 115 kDa foi sequenciada e identificada como a proteína precursora da cadeia α da β-conglicinina e o spot das amostras GM que apresentou diferença estatística significativa foi identificado como a proteína precursora de G4 glicinina. A diferença observada entre as variedades parentais e GM para as subunidades α de β-conglicinina e G4 glicinina pode ter ocorrido devido a variações normais observadas entre diferentes variedades de soja. Os resultados demonstram a viabilidade de aplicação das ferramentas proteômicas na identificação de alterações de perfis protéicos de amostras de soja parentais e GM. Pelos dados obtidos podemos concluir que as diferenças apresentadas não comprometem a inocuidade alimentar das amostras de soja GM em relação a suas respectivas variedades parentais. / Genetically modified soya-tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate culture has been derived from the more cultivated genetic engineering in the world today. As GM soya beans whole food has been investigated in relation to your biosafety. New strategies have been developed and applied research in this field, and fast and efficient methods of analysis proteomics have been used for assessment and monitoring of food security and safety, indicating changes in own protein profile between conventional and GM varieties. The aim of this work was to assess the maps soy protein samples of conventional and genetically modified their derived to the herbicide glyphosate-tolerant, using Proteomics analysis techniques with emphasis on food safety. Six samples were used for conventional soya, three and three derived from GM parental, grown between 2004-2005. The crude protein extract own was subjected to analysis by electrophoresis one-dimensional and two-dimensional. 2D electrophoresis using Strip was held with pH gradient of 3-10 and 4-7. Protein maps images of six varieties produced in replicates have been analysed by the 2D Platinum software ImageMaster. The potential allergenic in crude protein extracts was evaluated for all varieties using allergic patient serum soya by immunoblotting. In the results obtained noted the presence of the main protein fractions of soya by one-dimensional electrophoresis without significant change between parental and GM samples, except for a band of 115 parental kDa present in the sample, but absent in GM samples. From the analysis by 2D electrophoresis peptides forms were identified corresponding to fractions of β-conglicinina and glicinina as well as several other proteins found in soy as trypsin inhibitor and lipoxygenase. Through the software has been possible to observe that a spot presented statistical difference between the samples tested, expressed in greater concentration in the samples GM in parenting. In tests of allergenicity, GM varieties protein extracts showed similar reactivity in respect of their parental varieties. 115 KDa protein was sequenced and identified as the protein precursor of α subunit of β-conglicinina and the spot that GM samples presented significant statistical difference was identified as the G4 glicinina protein precursor. The difference between parental and GM varieties for subunits α of β-conglicinina and G4 glicinina may have occurred due to normal variation between different varieties of soy. The results demonstrate the viability of applying the tools Proteomics in identification of protein profiles changes of soya samples parental and GM. By data obtained can be concluded that the differences do not compromise the safety of food GM soybean samples with regard to their parental varieties.

Universiẗat, Diss., 2003--Freiburg. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [429]-454) and index.

Diss. (sammanfattning) Uppsala : Univ., 2004. / Härtill 4 uppsatser.

A soja geneticamente modificada tolerante ao herbicida glifosato tem sido a cultura derivada da engenharia genética mais cultivada atualmente no mundo. Como todo alimento GM a soja tem sido alvo de investigação em relação a sua Biossegurança. Novas estratégias têm sido desenvolvidas e aplicadas neste campo de pesquisa, sendo que métodos rápidos e eficientes de análise proteômica têm sido utilizados para avaliação e monitoramento da segurança e inocuidade alimentar, indicando mudanças no perfil protéico entre variedades convencionais e GM. O objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar os mapas protéicos de amostras de soja convencionais e suas derivadas geneticamente modificadas tolerantes ao herbicida glifosato, utilizando técnicas de análise proteômica com ênfase para inocuidade alimentar. Foram utilizadas seis amostras de soja, sendo três convencionais parentais e três derivadas GM, cultivadas entre 2004-2005, em Goiás. O extrato bruto protéico foi submetido à análise por eletroforese unidimensional e bidimensional. A eletroforese 2D, foi realizada utilizando tiras com gradiente de pH de 3-10 e 4-7. As imagens dos mapas protéicos das seis variedades, produzidas em replicatas, foram analisadas pelo software ImageMaster 2D Platinum. O potencial alergênico do extrato protéico bruto foi avaliado para todas as variedades utilizando soro de pacientes alérgicos à soja através de immunoblotting. Nos resultados obtidos observou-se a presença das principais frações protéicas da soja pela eletroforese unidimensional sem alteração significativa entre as amostras parentais e GM, exceto para uma banda de 115 kDa presente nas amostras parentais, mas ausente nas amostras GM. A partir da análise por eletroforese 2D foram identificadas as formas peptídicas correspondentes às frações de β-conglicinina e glicinina bem como diversas outras proteínas encontradas na soja como o inibidor de tripsina e a lipoxigenase. Através do software foi possível observar que um spot apresentou diferença estatística entre as amostras analisadas, expresso em maior concentração nas amostras GM do que nas parentais. Nos testes de alergenicidade, os extratos protéicos das variedades GM demonstraram reatividade similar em relação as suas respectivas variedades parentais. A proteína de 115 kDa foi sequenciada e identificada como a proteína precursora da cadeia α da β-conglicinina e o spot das amostras GM que apresentou diferença estatística significativa foi identificado como a proteína precursora de G4 glicinina. A diferença observada entre as variedades parentais e GM para as subunidades α de β-conglicinina e G4 glicinina pode ter ocorrido devido a variações normais observadas entre diferentes variedades de soja. Os resultados demonstram a viabilidade de aplicação das ferramentas proteômicas na identificação de alterações de perfis protéicos de amostras de soja parentais e GM. Pelos dados obtidos podemos concluir que as diferenças apresentadas não comprometem a inocuidade alimentar das amostras de soja GM em relação a suas respectivas variedades parentais. / Genetically modified soya-tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate culture has been derived from the more cultivated genetic engineering in the world today. As GM soya beans whole food has been investigated in relation to your biosafety. New strategies have been developed and applied research in this field, and fast and efficient methods of analysis proteomics have been used for assessment and monitoring of food security and safety, indicating changes in own protein profile between conventional and GM varieties. The aim of this work was to assess the maps soy protein samples of conventional and genetically modified their derived to the herbicide glyphosate-tolerant, using Proteomics analysis techniques with emphasis on food safety. Six samples were used for conventional soya, three and three derived from GM parental, grown between 2004-2005. The crude protein extract own was subjected to analysis by electrophoresis one-dimensional and two-dimensional. 2D electrophoresis using Strip was held with pH gradient of 3-10 and 4-7. Protein maps images of six varieties produced in replicates have been analysed by the 2D Platinum software ImageMaster. The potential allergenic in crude protein extracts was evaluated for all varieties using allergic patient serum soya by immunoblotting. In the results obtained noted the presence of the main protein fractions of soya by one-dimensional electrophoresis without significant change between parental and GM samples, except for a band of 115 parental kDa present in the sample, but absent in GM samples. From the analysis by 2D electrophoresis peptides forms were identified corresponding to fractions of β-conglicinina and glicinina as well as several other proteins found in soy as trypsin inhibitor and lipoxygenase. Through the software has been possible to observe that a spot presented statistical difference between the samples tested, expressed in greater concentration in the samples GM in parenting. In tests of allergenicity, GM varieties protein extracts showed similar reactivity in respect of their parental varieties. 115 KDa protein was sequenced and identified as the protein precursor of α subunit of β-conglicinina and the spot that GM samples presented significant statistical difference was identified as the G4 glicinina protein precursor. The difference between parental and GM varieties for subunits α of β-conglicinina and G4 glicinina may have occurred due to normal variation between different varieties of soy. The results demonstrate the viability of applying the tools Proteomics in identification of protein profiles changes of soya samples parental and GM. By data obtained can be concluded that the differences do not compromise the safety of food GM soybean samples with regard to their parental varieties.