No abstract

Over the past two decades, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) has emerged as one of the three principal analytical techniques used in metabolomics (the other two being gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and liquid chromatography coupled with single-stage mass spectrometry (LC-MS)). The relative ease of sample preparation, the ability to quantify metabolite levels, the high level of experimental reproducibility, and the inherently nondestructive nature of NMR spectroscopy have made it the preferred platform for long-term or large-scale clinical metabolomic studies. These advantages, however, are often outweighed by the fact that most other analytical techniques, including both LC-MS and GC-MS, are inherently more sensitive than NMR, with lower limits of detection typically being 10 to 100 times better. This review is intended to introduce readers to the field of NMR-based metabolomics and to highlight both the advantages and disadvantages of NMR spectroscopy for metabolomic studies. It will also explore some of the unique strengths of NMR-based metabolomics, particularly with regard to isotope selection/detection, mixture deconvolution via 2D spectroscopy, automation, and the ability to noninvasively analyze native tissue specimens. Finally, this review will highlight a number of emerging NMR techniques and technologies that are being used to strengthen its utility and overcome its inherent limitations in metabolomic applications.

The two leading analytical approaches to metabolomics are mass spectrometry (MS) and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. Although currently overshadowed by MS in terms of numbers of compounds resolved, NMR spectroscopy offers advantages both on its own and coupled with MS. NMR data are highly reproducible and quantitative over a wide dynamic range and are unmatched for determining structures of unknowns. NMR is adept at tracing metabolic pathways and fluxes using isotope labels. Moreover, NMR is non-destructive and can be utilized in vivo. NMR results have a proven track record of translating in vitro findings to in vivo clinical applications.

In the small intestine, type 2 responses are regulated by a signaling circuit that involves tuft cells and group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s). Here, we identified the microbial metabolite succinate as an activating ligand for small intestinal (SI) tuft cells. Sequencing analyses of tuft cells isolated from the small intestine, gall bladder, colon, thymus, and trachea revealed that expression of tuft cell chemosensory receptors is tissue specific. SI tuft cells expressed the succinate receptor (SUCNR1), and providing succinate in drinking water was sufficient to induce a multifaceted type 2 immune response via the tuft-ILC2 circuit. The helminth Nippostrongylus brasiliensis and a tritrichomonad protist both secreted succinate as a metabolite. In vivo sensing of the tritrichomonad required SUCNR1, whereas N. brasiliensis was SUCNR1 independent. These findings define a paradigm wherein tuft cells monitor microbial metabolites to initiate type 2 immunity and suggest the existence of other sensing pathways triggering the response to helminths.