Next Article in Journal
asb5a/asb5b Double Knockout Affects Zebrafish Cardiac Contractile Function
Next Article in Special Issue
Highly Similar Tetramerization Domains from the p53 Protein of Different Mammalian Species Possess Varying Biophysical, Functional and Structural Properties
Previous Article in Journal
Research Progress on the Relationship between Vitamins and Diabetes: Systematic Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Carnosine, Zinc and Copper: A Menage a Trois in Bone and Cartilage Protection
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 22
10.3390/ijms242216369
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defense in the Heart, Liver, and Kidney of Bat Species with Different Feeding Habits

by
Francielly Dias Pereira
1,2,†,
Diego Antonio Mena Canata
1,2,†,
Tiago Boeira Salomon
1,
Fernanda Schäfer Hackenhaar
3,
María João Ramos Pereira
4,
Mara Silveira Benfato
1,2 and
Pabulo Henrique Rampelotto
5,6,*
1
Biophysics Department, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil
2
Post Graduate Program in Cellular and Molecular Biology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil
3
Department of Medical Biosciences, Umeå University, 90185 Umeå, Sweden
4
Post Graduate Program in Animal Biology, Laboratory of Evolution, Systematics and Ecology of Birds and Mammals, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil
5
Graduate Program in Biological Sciences—Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil
6
Bioinformatics and Biostatistics Core Facility, Instituto de Ciências Básicas da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre 91501-970, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(22), 16369; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242216369
Submission received: 20 September 2023 / Revised: 10 November 2023 / Accepted: 12 November 2023 / Published: 15 November 2023
(This article belongs to the Collection Feature Paper Collection in Biochemistry)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to compare the oxidative metabolism of four neotropical bat species with different feeding habits and investigate the relationship between their feeding habits and oxidative status. In terms of oxidative damage, our findings revealed major differences among the four bat species. In particular, hematophagous bats had lower levels of oxidative damage in the heart but higher levels in the liver. Nectarivorous bats had lower levels of carbonyl groups in the kidneys compared to insectivorous and hematophagous bats. The activity of various antioxidant and non-antioxidant enzymes in the heart, liver, and kidney also showed significant differences among the bat species. H2O2 consumption was lower in the heart of hematophagous bats, while insectivorous bats exhibited the highest enzymatic activity in the kidney. SOD activity was lower in the heart of hematophagous bats and lower in nectarivorous bats in the liver. Fumarase activity was higher in the heart of frugivorous/insectivorous and lower in nectarivorous/hematophagous bats. GPx activity was higher in the heart of nectarivorous/insectivorous and higher in the kidney of insectivorous bats. GST activity was higher in the heart of nectarivorous and lower in hematophagous bats. The correlation analysis between oxidative markers and enzymatic/non-enzymatic antioxidants in the heart, liver, and kidney exhibited distinct patterns of correlations due to variations in antioxidant defense mechanisms and oxidative stress responses in different organs. The observed differences in oxidative damage, antioxidant enzyme activities, and correlations between oxidative markers and antioxidants highlight the adaptability and complexity of the antioxidant defense systems in these bats. Each organ appears to have specific demands and adaptations to cope with oxidative stress based on its physiological functions and exposure to dietary components. Our results have major significance for the conservation and management of bats, which are threatened species despite being crucial components of ecosystems. Our study’s implications go beyond bat biology and offer valuable insights into comparative oxidative physiology.

1. Introduction

Bats are important ecological and evolutionary agents in the neotropical region. They are known to have diverse feeding habits and play a crucial role in reforestation (pollinators and seed dispersers) and pest control [1,2]. In recent years, studies have focused on the physiological and biochemical adaptations of bats to their feeding habits, including their oxidative metabolism. Antioxidants are molecules that protect cells from oxidative damage caused by reactive oxygen species and nitrogen species, which in excess can cause cell dysfunction and disease [3,4].
It is assumed that their oxidative metabolism is closely linked to their feeding habits, given the diverse range of diets they exhibit, which include nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous. Some bat species even combine two different diets, such as consuming both fruits and insects [5]. This diversity in diet among bats may be attributed to the unique physiological adaptations that allow them to exploit different food resources, highlighting their remarkable ecological versatility.
Frugivorous and nectarivorous bats are expected to have higher levels of antioxidants in comparison to their insectivorous and hematophagous counterparts [6]. This is because their diets are rich in carotenoids, flavonoids, and vitamins, which are known to be major antioxidants. On the other hand, the hematophagous diet contains high concentrations of iron due to its consumption of blood, making it highly oxidative [7]. The stark contrast in diets between these bat species highlights the importance of examining oxidative metabolism in relation to diet and ecological adaptations.
However, our knowledge of this relevant topic is limited due to the lack of comprehensive studies on the oxidative metabolism of a wide range of bat species, particularly those with different feeding habits. Most of the existing studies have focused on a small number of species or specific dietary groups, limiting our understanding of the overall variability in the antioxidant status of bats [8]. Furthermore, the physiology and metabolic pathways of bats are still poorly understood, and this can make it difficult to determine which antioxidants are most critical to the health and well-being of bats. Finally, most of the existing studies have focused on enzymatic antioxidants such as superoxide dismutase (SOD) and catalase (CAT) [9,10], and there is a lack of research on non-enzymatic antioxidants. Markers of oxidative damage in macromolecules together with non-enzymatic antioxidants may be more reliable indicators of oxidative metabolism than enzymatic antioxidants alone, knowing that non-enzymatic antioxidants have an important role in the neutralization of reactive species [4].
Considering these limitations, more comprehensive studies on oxidative metabolism in bats, particularly those with diverse feeding habits, are needed to provide a better understanding of the adaptations and mechanisms they use to cope with oxidative stress. Such studies may also have implications for the conservation and management of bats, which are crucial components of ecosystems and play an important role in maintaining ecosystem health and functioning.
In this work, we compared the oxidative metabolism of four neotropical male bat species with different feeding habits, namely: frugivorous, nectarivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous. Our hypothesis is that the oxidative metabolism of these species will vary according to their feeding habits. To test our hypothesis, we measured the enzymatic antioxidant activities, non-enzymatic antioxidant levels, and oxidative damage in macromolecules (lipids and proteins) in three different organs (heart, liver, and kidney) of each species.
Studying the oxidative metabolism of various bat species can reveal their adaptive mechanisms and how they manage oxidative stress, which can shed light on the physiological adaptations that have enabled bats to thrive in diverse ecological niches. Moreover, our study’s implications go beyond bat biology and offer insights into comparative oxidative physiology.

2. Results

2.1. Oxidative Damage

Figure 1 illustrates the oxidative damage observed in the heart, liver, and kidney of four different bat-feeding habits. The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S1. The levels of carbonyl groups and malondialdehyde exhibited comparable patterns in the heart and liver (Figure 1A,B). Notably, hematophagous bats displayed significantly low levels of oxidative damage in the heart (0.019 ± 0.005 nmol/mg protein for carbonyl groups and 35.19 ± 10.89 nmol/mg protein for malondialdehyde) and high levels in the liver (1.1 ± 0.2 nmol/mg protein for carbonyl groups and 1317.5 ± 259.2 nmol/mg protein for malondialdehyde) when compared to the other species. In the kidneys, although the levels of malondialdehyde were relatively similar among bat species (3.0 ± 1.0 nmol/mg protein), the carbonyl group levels were significantly lower in nectarivorous bats (0.009 ± 0.006 nmol/mg protein) and higher in insectivorous (0.08 ± 0.03 nmol/mg protein) and hematophagous bats (0.11 ± 0.04 nmol/mg protein) (Figure 1A,B).

2.2. Antioxidant Enzymes

Figure 2 presents the activity of antioxidant enzymes measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of the four bat species. The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S2. The levels of H2O2 consumption, which measure the activity of enzymes, were found to be lower in the heart of hematophagous bats (995.5 ± 446.1 µmol/min/mg protein) compared to other bat species (Figure 2A left panel), while minimal variance was observed in the liver (13,269.6 ± 8645.4 µmol/min/mg protein) (Figure 2A middle panel). The kidney of insectivorous bats exhibited the highest enzymatic activity (14.0 ± 2.2 µmol/min/mg protein), while nectarivorous bats demonstrated comparatively lower activity levels (0.7 ± 0.4 µmol/min/mg protein) (Figure 2A right panel).
Regarding SOD, its activity was lower in the heart (2.7 ± 0.7 U/mg protein) and liver (2.6 ± 0.4 U/mg protein) of hematophagous bats (Figure 2B right panel; Figure 2B middle panel), and higher in frugivorous (2.8 ± 0.8 U/mg protein) and insectivorous bats (4.8 ± 0.9 U/mg protein) in the kidney (Figure 3B left panel).
The fumarase activity was higher in the heart of frugivorous (29.5 ± 7.6 U/mg protein) and insectivorous (26.0 ± 8.2 U/mg protein) while lower in nectarivorous (13.0 ± 9.3 U/mg protein) and hematophagous (6.6 ± 4.1 U/mg protein) (Figure 2C left panel); lower in nectarivorous (40.7 ± 27.7 U/mg protein) while higher in insectivorous (237.3 ± 42.6 U/mg protein) and hematophagous (203.0 ± 43.2 U/mg protein) in the liver (Figure 2C middle panel); and lower in nectarivorous (0.6 ± 0.3 U/mg protein) and frugivorous (0.5 ± 0.2 U/mg protein) and higher in insectivorous (5.4 ± 0.9 U/mg protein) and hematophagous (4.0 ± 0.9 U/mg protein) in the kidney (Figure 2C left panel).
The GPx activity was higher in the heart of nectarivorous (19,035.8 ± 4587.5 U/mg protein) and insectivorous (17,748.3 ± 3244.5 U/mg protein) (Figure 2D left panel); higher in frugivorous (20,027.7 ± 6185.6 U/mg protein) and insectivorous (21,368.6 ± 3096.0 U/mg protein) and lower in hematophagous (1573.2 ± 589.3 U/mg protein) in the liver (Figure 2D middle panel); and higher in the kidney of insectivorous bats (8.0 ± 1.8 U/mg protein) compared to other bat species (Figure 2D left panel).
Regarding GST activity, it was higher in the heart of nectarivorous (33.2 ± 8.4 U/mg protein) and lower in hematophagous (5.3 ± 1.6 U/mg protein) (Figure 2E left panel); higher in hematophagous (1127.0 ± 134.9 U/mg protein) and lower in nectarivorous (265.6 ± 81.1 U/mg protein) in the liver (Figure 2E middle panel); and higher in hematophagous (1.1 ± 0.3 U/mg protein) and lower in frugivorous (0.1 ± 0 U/mg protein) in the kidney (Figure 2E left panel).

2.3. Non-Enzymatic Antioxidants

Figure 3 presents the levels of non-enzymatic antioxidants measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of the four bat species. The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S3.
Total glutathione (Figure 3A), oxidized glutathione (Figure 3B), and reduced glutathione (Figure 3C) were lower in the heart of hematophagous bats compared to other bat species. In the heart, there was 508.6 ± 82.6 nmol/mg protein for total glutathione, 250.8 ± 69.2 nmol/mg protein for oxidized glutathione, and 348.3 ± 180.7 nmol/mg protein for reduced glutathione; in the liver, there was 3682.6 ± 1882.5 nmol/mg protein for total glutathione, 6776.2 ± 6007.7 nmol/mg protein for oxidized glutathione, and 418.3 ± 235.8 nmol/mg protein for reduced glutathione. In the kidney, they were lower in nectarivorous and hematophagous bats.
The GSSG/GSH ratio was found to be higher in the heart of hematophagous bats (0.85 ± 0.44) and lower in nectarivorous (1.15 ± 0.06) (Figure 3D left panel) and higher in the liver (59.28 ± 29.15) (Figure 3D middle panel) and kidney (0.53 ± 0.11) (Figure 3D right panel) of nectarivorous compared to other bat species.
The levels of nitrite and nitrates were lower in the heart (0.28 ± 0.11 nmol/mg protein) and kidney (2.9 ± 0.4 nmol/mg protein) of hematophagous compared to other bat species (Figure 3E left panel; Figure 3E right panel) and higher in the liver of frugivorous (6.0 ± 1.2 nmol/mg protein) and hematophagous (6.6 ± 2.5 nmol/mg protein) and lower in nectarivorous (2.2 ± 1.1 nmol/mg protein) and insectivorous (3.1 ± 0.4 nmol/mg protein) (Figure 3E middle panel).
The levels of Vitamin C were presented in a previous article recently published by our group [11].

2.4. Principal Component Analysis

Figure 4 presents the PCA made with the parameters measured in Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3. Based on their feeding habitat, the PCA analysis results showed a distinct differentiation in the clustering of samples for the heart (Figure 4A), liver (Figure 4B), and kidney (Figure 4C). These results were confirmed by the pairwise PERMANOVA test among samples grouped according to bat species (Tables S4–S6).

2.5. Correlation

The correlation between oxidative markers and (enzymatic and non-enzymatic) antioxidants measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of bats is presented in Figure 5. In the heart (Figure 5A), oxidative markers were positively associated with enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidants (except for GSSG/GSH). VitC was positively associated with enzyme activity, except for fumarase. In addition, most enzymes were positively correlated with each other. On the other hand, GSSG/GSH was negatively associated with oxidative markers, NO2 and NO3, and enzyme activity (except for fumarase and GPx).
In the liver (Figure 5B), the correlation pattern was more complex, with a mix of positive and negative associations. While carbonyl was positively associated with NO2 and NO3, MDA, and H2O2 consumption, it was negatively associated with VitC, SOD, and GPx. MDA was positively associated with NO2 and NO3, fumarase, and GST, but it was negatively associated with GSSG/GSH and SOD. SOD was negatively associated with oxidative markers, fumarase, and GST, but it was positively associated with GPx.
In the kidney (Figure 5C), the correlation pattern was more like the heart pattern, with carbonyl positively correlated with enzymatic activity and enzymes positively correlated with each other. Interestingly, GSSG/GSH was negatively associated with enzymatic activity (except for GST), VitC, and carbonyl.

3. Discussion

In this study, we measured and compared the oxidative metabolism of four neotropical bat species with different feeding habits and investigated the relationship between their feeding habits and oxidative status. Our results provide valuable insights into the oxidative damage and antioxidant defense mechanisms in these bat species.
Notably, while studies on wildlife usually face challenges in controlling confounding factors, we took careful measures to control major common interferences encountered in wildlife studies. All the animal species included in our research exhibit nocturnal habits and follow similar circadian cycles. They share similar foraging times, including feeding and flight activities. Additionally, we observed that all species had nearly identical entry and exit times for the caves. To ensure uniformity, the capturing process was carried out in the evening, ensuring that all bats had not consumed any food and were in the same basal physiological state. Furthermore, none of the four species engaged in hibernation or torpor, which are physiological adaptations that enable animals to conserve energy during unfavorable conditions. For these reasons, our observations indicate that the differences in these habits among the species are not significant enough to account for the variations we analyzed in terms of redox metabolism. Instead, we attribute these differences to variations in the diet of these species. Additionally, the stress associated with capturing the animals, including the time spent on the net, handling of the individuals, and euthanasia procedures, was consistent among all four species and was performed by the same individuals. By doing so, we ensured uniformity in the stressors applied, reducing the potential for significant intraspecies differences that could have arisen from these procedures.
Regarding the bat species, Glossophaga soricina is found throughout Latin America and consumes nectar flowers and floral parts [12]. This species is capable of sustained flight for extended periods. Sturnira lilium is found in South America and primarily feeds on fruits from the Solanaceae family [13]. They are adapted for flight and foraging in forested habitats. Molossus molossus is found in Latin America and feeds on various insects but shows a particular preference for Coleoptera [14]. This species is known for its fast and agile flight, allowing them to catch prey in flight. The common vampire bat Desmodus rotundus is also found in Latin America and is the only species that feeds on the blood of domestic cattle, which is high in protein but low in carbohydrates [15]. This requires them to have a larger body size and higher body weight compared to other bats (Table 1), which primarily feed on insects and fruits. Additionally, their larger size allows them to store more blood for longer periods between feedings. The four bat species are active at night and are considered nocturnal species.
In terms of oxidative damage, our findings revealed variations among the different bat species and organs. The levels of carbonyl groups and malondialdehyde, which serve as markers of oxidative damage, exhibited distinct patterns in the heart, liver, and kidney. Interestingly, hematophagous bats displayed low levels of oxidative damage in the heart but high levels in the liver. This finding suggests that hematophagous bats possess efficient antioxidant defense mechanisms in the heart, which may be attributed to their unique feeding habits and associated physiological adaptations. In contrast, the liver, being involved in the detoxification process, may experience increased oxidative stress due to the ingestion of blood meals rich in heme iron and other pro-oxidants [16].
Furthermore, the kidney exhibited differential patterns of oxidative damage across bat species. While malondialdehyde levels were relatively similar among the bat species, carbonyl group levels were lower in nectarivorous bats and higher in insectivorous and hematophagous bats. These differences could be attributed to variations in the metabolic demands of the kidney and the specific dietary components consumed by the different bat species [17]. Nectarivorous bats primarily consume plant-based nectar, which is rich in antioxidants, potentially contributing to their lower levels of oxidative damage in the kidney.
In addition to oxidative damage, we examined the activity of various antioxidant enzymes in the heart, liver, and kidney of the studied bat species. Our results demonstrated variations in the activity of antioxidant enzymes among the different feeding groups and organs. Hematophagous bats displayed lower activity of H2O2 consumption and SOD in the heart compared to other bat species, indicating potential adaptations to minimize oxidative stress in this vital organ [18]. Conversely, the kidney of insectivorous bats exhibited the highest enzymatic activity, suggesting an increased demand for antioxidant defense in this organ [19], possibly due to the higher metabolic rates associated with insectivory.
Non-enzymatic antioxidants also showed variations across the bat species and organs. The lower total glutathione levels in the heart of hematophagous bats suggest a reduced GSH pool in these bats. This may be indicative of lower baseline antioxidant capacity in their hearts, potentially making them more susceptible to oxidative stress [20]. The liver of all bat species showed higher GSH levels compared to the heart. This is in line with the liver’s role as a major organ for GSH synthesis and storage. The higher GSH levels in the liver contribute to maintaining the overall GSH pool in bats, which is essential for antioxidant defense and detoxification processes [21]. The lower GSH levels in the kidney of nectarivorous and hematophagous bats indicate a potential reduction in the GSH pool in these bat species. This may have implications for their ability to counteract oxidative stress and detoxify harmful compounds in the kidney. Hematophagous bats displayed higher GSSG/GSH ratios in the heart, indicating an imbalance in the redox state, potentially due to the presence of pro-oxidants from blood meals [22]. Interestingly, nectarivorous bats exhibited higher GSSG/GSH ratios in the liver and kidney, suggesting a higher demand for GSH recycling and antioxidant capacity in these organs. The GSSG/GSH ratio is an important indicator of oxidative stress and redox balance, and its elevation in specific organs reflects the dynamic nature of antioxidant defense mechanisms in bats [23].
Our PCA results further supported the differentiation of samples based on their feeding habits in the heart, liver, and kidney. This finding suggests that feeding habits play a significant role in shaping the antioxidant profiles and oxidative status of bats, highlighting the influence of dietary components on oxidative metabolism.
The correlation analysis between oxidative markers and enzymatic/non-enzymatic antioxidants provided additional insights into the relationships between oxidative stress and antioxidant defense in the bat species studied. These correlations can shed light on the interplay between antioxidant capacity and oxidative damage, further elucidating the adaptive strategies employed by bats to cope with oxidative stress induced by their respective feeding habits [24]. Overall, the heart, liver, and kidney exhibited different patterns of correlations due to variations in antioxidant defense mechanisms and oxidative stress responses in different organs. The mixed positive and negative associations highlight the complex nature of antioxidant defense mechanisms and oxidative stress responses in these tissues. It further emphasizes the importance of studying organ-specific variations in oxidative stress and antioxidant systems to gain a comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms.
In the heart, the positive associations highlight potential adaptive responses, where increased oxidative marker levels trigger enhanced antioxidant defense mechanisms. The positive associations between VitC and enzyme activity further emphasize their complementary roles in mitigating oxidative stress [25]. The negative association between GSSG/GSH and oxidative markers could indicate that when the oxidative stress is high, the GSH in the cells is being consumed, leading to a decrease in GSH levels and an increase in GSSG/GSH ratio. The negative association between GSSG/GSH and enzyme activity could also be explained by the fact that some enzymes require GSH as a cofactor for their activity. For example, GPx is an enzyme that uses GSH to detoxify H2O2 and lipid peroxides, and a decrease in GSH levels could lead to a decrease in GPx activity, which in turn would increase oxidative stress. Therefore, the negative association between GSSG/GSH and the other measured parameters could indicate a shift in the redox balance towards oxidation, which may have negative consequences for cellular function and health [26].
In the liver, the positive correlations of carbonyl are related to elevated levels of nitrogen species, MDA, and increased H2O2 consumption, reflecting oxidative stress [27]. On the other hand, the negative correlations of carbonyl indicate a potential depletion of antioxidant defenses in response to increased oxidative stress [28]. Regarding MDA, its positive correlations imply that higher MDA levels are linked to increased levels of nitrogen species, fumarase, and GST activity, suggesting oxidative stress and potential adaptive responses [29]. On the other hand, its negative associations suggest impaired antioxidant defenses and potential oxidative damage due to elevated MDA levels. SOD activity was associated with lower levels of oxidative markers, fumarase, and GST, suggesting an antioxidant role of SOD in mitigating oxidative stress [30]. On the other hand, SOD activity was linked to increased levels of GPx, highlighting potential cooperative effects between these enzymes in antioxidant defense mechanisms [31].
In the kidney, the correlation pattern was more similar to the heart. Carbonyl in the kidney was positively correlated with enzymatic activity [32], similar to the heart pattern. Enzymes in the kidney also show positive correlations with each other, indicating a coordinated response of enzymatic antioxidants [33]. Interestingly, GSSG/GSH in the kidney was negatively associated with enzymatic activity (except for GST), VitC, and carbonyl. This suggests that higher GSSG/GSH levels in the kidney are associated with decreased enzymatic antioxidant activity, lower VitC levels, and potentially increased oxidative stress represented by carbonyl levels.
These findings contribute to our understanding of the intricate relationship between feeding habits, oxidative metabolism, and antioxidant defense in neotropical bat species. Furthermore, they underscore the importance of considering multiple biomarkers and organs when assessing the antioxidant status of bats, as different organs may respond differently to oxidative stress depending on their functional roles and exposure to dietary pro-oxidants. Bats’ varying restrictive diets not only shape their morphological structures but also modulate their metabolic patterns [34]. These adaptations enable them to maintain normal energetic processes during flight while minimizing adverse oxidative effects. It is noteworthy that despite experiencing high metabolic peaks, bats seem to have minimal detrimental effects due to oxidation. This phenomenon suggests a unique metabolic regulation system in bats that effectively mitigates the adverse effects of oxidation. The ability to maintain a high level of metabolic activity with minimal oxidative stress highlights the impressive physiological adaptations of bats and underscores the significance of studying their metabolic processes.
In addition, the life expectancy of bats can vary due to their diet. Different species of bats have different dietary preferences, and their diet can impact their overall health and lifespan [35]. Bats that consume a variety of nutritionally rich diets tend to have longer lifespans than those with limited or poor-quality food sources. For example, insectivorous bats tend to have relatively shorter lifespans compared to other bat species. Their high metabolic rate, which is necessary for active flight and capturing fast-moving insects, can lead to increased wear and tear on their bodies over time. As a result, many insectivorous bats have relatively shorter lifespans, typically ranging from 2 to 10 years, although some may live longer. On the other hand, frugivorous and nectarivorous bats generally have longer lifespans compared to insectivorous bats [36]. The diet of fruit bats is often composed of fruits and nectar, which are energy-rich and less demanding on their metabolism compared to chasing insects. This can lead to longer lifespans, with some fruit bats living up to 20–30 years in the wild. In turn, hematophagous bats may have a life expectancy of around 7 to 12 years in the wild. As blood is a high-quality food source, hematophagous bats require less energy to obtain their nutrients than insectivorous bats, for example, which need to consume large quantities of insects to meet their dietary needs [37]. Additionally, hematophagous bats have evolved specialized adaptations, such as powerful jaw muscles and sharp teeth, which allow them to feed on blood more efficiently [38]. These adaptations help reduce the amount of energy they need to expend on hunting and feeding, which in turn may contribute to their longer lifespan. Additionally, other factors, such as predation, habitat availability, and environmental conditions, can also affect the life expectancy of bats. Bats face various challenges in the wild, and their longevity is influenced by a combination of factors, including diet, ecological niche, and environmental conditions.
Our study’s limitation is the relatively small sample size of animals per group, which could presume a limited generalization of our findings. However, obtaining a larger sample size was challenging due to the difficulties in capturing and studying wildlife animals, especially for threatened species such as bats. We were only authorized to use 10 animals per group under the planned experimental design, as per Brazilian law’s strict regulations on capturing wildlife for research purposes. Another important aspect to be discussed is seasonality. Similar to other studies comparing different bat diets [16], our work encompassed various seasons of the year, with each bat species collected in a specific season. Factors influencing food availability, including seasonality and weather, may affect the diet of each bat species differently. Seasonal activity patterns of bats have been observed in various studies [39,40,41,42], but it is important to note that not all bat species show seasonal variation in their diets. For instance, a previous study on S. lilium, the frugivorous bat analyzed in our work, did not observe seasonal variation in its diet [13]. These findings highlight the highly variable and complex nature of seasonal activity patterns in bats. In our study, insectivorous and hematophagous bats were collected during the same summer season, yet they presented different PCA profiles. This suggests that while seasonality is a factor, it probably does not explain the heterogeneity found in our results. Diet likely plays a crucial role in shaping the observed differences.
Future research endeavors should aim to investigate the underlying molecular mechanisms responsible for the observed variations in antioxidant status among bat species with different feeding habits. Additionally, longitudinal studies examining the antioxidant profiles and oxidative stress responses of bats in different environmental contexts and physiological conditions will enhance our understanding of the dynamic nature of antioxidant defense systems. In addition, studies including both male and female bats should be performed to investigate potential gender-specific differences in their metabolic traits.
Overall, this study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on the antioxidant status of bats and emphasizes the need for further research to fully comprehend the adaptive strategies and physiological trade-offs involved in maintaining redox balance in these remarkable neotropical bat species. Such insights are crucial for conservation efforts, as understanding the antioxidant capacity of bats can inform strategies to mitigate oxidative stressors in their natural habitats and promote their overall health and well-being.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Ethical Aspects

The bats in this study were captured under a license authorized by the Brazilian Biodiversity Information and Authorization System (SISBIO, No. 47202-1) and the National Council for the Control of Animal Experimentation (CONCEA, No. 33339). In addition, the Ethics Committee on the Use of Animals of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul approved the study (No. 28645).

4.2. Animals and Organ Collection

The four bat species used in this study and their feeding habits are presented in Table 1. The bat species captured were Glossophaga soricina (n = 10), Sturnira lilium (n = 10), Molossus molossus (n = 10), and Desmodus rotundus (n = 9). Figure S1 indicates the collection sites and coordinates. Details of the capturing process of all animals as well as organ removal and storage were described in our previous study [43]. Briefly, 39 adult male bats were captured in southern Brazil from summer 2018 to winter 2019. In the field or with voucher specimens, estimating the degree of ossification in wing elements is an established technique for distinguishing adult bats [44], which was the technique used in our study. Different capturing methods, such as dip nets, mist nets, or harp traps, were used based on the specific shelter type. Bats were captured at the beginning of the night to ensure fasting and were on-site euthanized using an intraperitoneal injection of xylazine (10 mg/kg) and ketamine (60 mg/kg). For this reason, it was not possible to collect blood samples. After euthanasia, the animals were immediately placed in plastic bags, frozen in liquid nitrogen, and kept on dry ice until their subsequent transfer to the local facility at the Biophysics Department, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (Porto Alegre 91501-970, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil), where they were stored in a freezer at −80 °C.

4.3. Organ Processing

The heart, liver, and kidneys were manually macerated. The tissues were macerated in a solution of 10 mL K3PO4 buffer (30 mmol/L), potassium chloride (120 mmol/L), phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (0.201 mmol/L), and desferroxamine (1.5 mmol/L). The samples were then sonicated three times for 10 s, followed by centrifugation at 1700× g twice for 10 min. The final supernatant was aliquoted into 1.5 mL microtubes and stored in a freezer at −80 °C. A 14,000× g centrifugation was carried out for 5 min before each assay.

4.4. Biochemical Analysis

Details of the biochemical analysis are presented in Supplementary Material. Briefly, oxidative damage was assessed by the levels of carbonyl groups and malondialdehyde (MDA). In addition, the activity of the following enzymes was measured: superoxide dismutase (SOD), fumarase, glutathione peroxidase (GPx), glutathione-S-transferase (GST), and H2O2 consumption. Non-enzymatic antioxidants were assessed by the amounts of nitrate and nitrite (NO2 and NO3) and the GSSG/GSH ratio.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, our study provides comprehensive insights into the oxidative metabolism of neotropical bat species with different feeding habits. The observed variations in oxidative damage, enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant activities, and correlations between oxidative markers and antioxidants highlight the complexity and adaptability of the antioxidant defense systems in these bats. The distinct patterns observed in oxidative damage and antioxidant enzyme activities among the different organs and bat species suggest that each organ has its own specific demands and adaptations to cope with oxidative stress based on its physiological functions and exposure to different dietary components.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms242216369/s1. References [45,46,47,48,49,50,51] are cited in Supplementary Materials.

Author Contributions

F.D.P.: organ collection and processing and biochemical analysis. D.A.M.C.: organ collection and processing and biochemical analysis. T.B.S.: biochemical analysis. F.S.H.: study design and animal collection. M.J.R.P.: study design, animal collection, and identification of bat sex and species. M.S.B.: study design, review, and editing. P.H.R.: analysis of results, writing, review, and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by CAPES (No. 88887.798411/2022-00).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Approved by CEUA/UFRGS on 15 September 2017 (No. 28645).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article and Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Boyles, J.G.; Cryan, P.M.; McCracken, G.F.; Kunz, T.H. Economic Importance of Bats in Agriculture. Science 2011, 332, 41–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Aziz, S.A.; McConkey, K.R.; Tanalgo, K.; Sritongchuay, T.; Low, M.-R.; Yong, J.Y.; Mildenstein, T.L.; Nuevo-Diego, C.E.; Lim, V.C.; Racey, P.A. The Critical Importance of Old World Fruit Bats for Healthy Ecosystems and Economies. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2021, 9, 641411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Fuloria, S.; Subramaniyan, V.; Karupiah, S.; Kumari, U.; Sathasivam, K.; Meenakshi, D.U.; Wu, Y.S.; Sekar, M.; Chitranshi, N.; Malviya, R.; et al. Comprehensive Review of Methodology to Detect Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) in Mammalian Species and Establish its Relationship with Antioxidants and Cancer. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hunyadi, A. The Mechanism(s) of Action of Antioxidants: From Scavenging Reactive Oxygen/Nitrogen Species to Redox Signaling and the Generation of Bioactive Secondary Metabolites. Med. Res. Rev. 2019, 39, 2505–2533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Orr, T.J.; Ortega, J.; Medellín, R.A.; Sánchez, C.D.; Hammond, K.A. Diet Choice in Frugivorous Bats: Gourmets or Operational Pragmatists? J. Mammal. 2016, 97, 1578–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Schneeberger, K.; Czirják, G.Á.; Voigt, C.C. Frugivory Is Associated with Low Measures of Plasma Oxidative Stress and High Antioxidant Concentration in Free-Ranging Bats. Naturwissenschaften 2014, 101, 285–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Graça-Souza, A.V.; Maya-Monteiro, C.; Paiva-Silva, G.O.; Braz, G.R.; Paes, M.C.; Sorgine, M.H.; Oliveira, M.F.; Oliveira, P.L. Adaptations against Heme Toxicity in Blood-Feeding Arthropods. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2006, 36, 322–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Oliveira, F.W.; Schindler, M.S.Z.; Cora, D.H.; Thiel, N.; Siebel, A.M.; Galiano, D. Oxidative State of the Frugivorous Bat Sturnira lilium (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) in Agricultural and Urban Areas of Southern Brazil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 30868–30874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wilhelm, D.; Althoff, S.L.; Dafre, A.L.; Boveris, A. Antioxidant Defenses, Longevity and Ecophysiology of South American Bats. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C-Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2007, 146, 214–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hanadhita, D.; Rahma, A.; Prawira, A.Y.; Mayasari, N.; Satyaningtijas, A.S.; Hondo, E.; Agungpriyono, S. The Spleen Morphophysiology of Fruit Bats. Anat. Histol. Embryol. 2019, 48, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mena Canata, D.A.; Benfato, M.S.; Pereira, F.D.; Pereira, M.J.R.; Rampelotto, P.H. Vitamin C Levels in Different Organs of Bat Species from Different Food Groups. Life 2022, 12, 2121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Lemke, T.O. Foraging Ecology of the Long-Nosed Bat, Glossophaga soricina, with Respect to Resource Availability. Ecology 1984, 65, 538–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jacomassa, F.A.F.; Bernardi, I.P.; Passos, F.C. Seasonal Diet Variation, Preferences and Availability of Resources Consumed by Sturnira lilium (É. Geoffroy St.-Hilaire, 1810) (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) in Brazilian Seasonal Deciduous Forest. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 2021, 93, e20201571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Willig, M.R.; Camilo, G.R.; Noble, S.J. Dietary Overlap in Frugivorous and Insectivorous Bats from Edaphic Cerrado Habitats of Brazil. J. Mammal. 1993, 74, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mantovan, K.B.; Menozzi, B.D.; Paiz, L.M.; Sevá, A.P.; Brandão, P.E.; Langoni, H. Geographic Distribution of Common Vampire Bat Desmodus rotundus (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) Shelters: Implications for the Spread of Rabies Virus to Cattle in Southeastern Brazil. Pathogens 2022, 11, 942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Freitas, R.M.P.; Oliveira, M.; Castro, D.L.J.; Sarandy, M.M.; Gonçalves, R.V.; Freitas, M.B. The Antioxidant Status of Three Neotropical Bat Species with Different Feeding Habits. Acta Chiropt. 2020, 21, 395–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Golpa, P. Morphological Adaptations in the Kidney and Urine Concentrating Ability in Relation to Dietary Habit in the Three Species of Bats. World J. Zool. 2013, 8, 198–205. [Google Scholar]
  18. van Deel, E.D.; Lu, Z.; Xu, X.; Zhu, G.; Hu, X.; Oury, T.D.; Bache, R.J.; Duncker, D.J.; Chen, Y. Extracellular Superoxide Dismutase Protects the Heart against Oxidative Stress and Hypertrophy after Myocardial Infarction. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2008, 44, 1305–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Schondube, J.E.; Herrera, M.L.G.; Martínez del Rio, C. Diet and the Evolution of Digestion and Renal Function in Phyllostomid Bats. Zoology 2001, 104, 59–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bajic, V.P.; Van Neste, C.; Obradovic, M.; Zafirovic, S.; Radak, D.; Bajic, V.B.; Essack, M.; Isenovic, E.R. Glutathione “Redox Homeostasis” and Its Relation to Cardiovascular Disease. Oxid. Med. Cell Longev. 2019, 2019, 5028181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Noctor, G.; Foyer, C.H. Intracellular Redox Compartmentation and ROS-Related Communication in Regulation and Signaling. Plant Physiol. 2016, 171, 1581–1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Stasiak, I.M.; Smith, D.A.; Ganz, T.; Crawshaw, G.J.; Hammermueller, J.D.; Bienzle, D.; Lillie, B.N. Iron Storage Disease (Hemochromatosis) and Hepcidin Response to Iron Load in Two Species of Pteropodid Fruit Bats Relative to the Common Vampire Bat. J. Comp. Physiol. B Biochem. Syst. Environ. Physiol. 2018, 188, 683–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Yin, Q.; Ge, H.; Liao, C.C.; Liu, D.; Zhang, S.; Pan, Y.H. Antioxidant Defenses in the Brains of Bats during Hibernation. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0152135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Ponnampalam, E.N.; Kiani, A.; Santhiravel, S.; Holman, B.W.B.; Lauridsen, C.; Dunshea, F.R. The Importance of Dietary Antioxidants on Oxidative Stress, Meat and Milk Production, and Their Preservative Aspects in Farm Animals: Antioxidant Action, Animal Health, and Product Quality. Animals 2022, 12, 3279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tan, M.; Yin, Y.; Ma, X.; Zhang, J.; Pan, W.; Tan, M.; Zhao, Y.; Yang, T.; Jiang, T.; Li, H. Glutathione System Enhancement for Cardiac Protection: Pharmacological Options against Oxidative Stress and Ferroptosis. Cell Death Dis. 2023, 14, 131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zitka, O.; Skalickova, S.; Gumulec, J.; Masarik, M.; Adam, V.; Hubalek, J.; Trnkova, L.; Kruseova, J.; Eckschlager, T.; Kizek, R. Redox Status Expressed as GSH:GSSG Ratio as a Marker for Oxidative Stress in Pediatric Tumour Patients. Oncol. Lett. 2012, 4, 1247–1253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Martín-Grau, M.; Pardo-Tendero, M.; Casanova, P.; Dromant, M.; Marrachelli, V.G.; Morales, J.M.; Borrás, C.; Pisoni, S.; Maestrini, S.; Di Blasio, A.M.; et al. Altered Lipid Moieties and Carbonyls in a Wistar Rat Dietary Model of Subclinical Fatty Liver: Potential Sex-Specific Biomarkers of Early Fatty Liver Disease? Antioxidants 2023, 12, 1808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kołota, A.; Głąbska, D.; Oczkowski, M.; Gromadzka-Ostrowska, J. Oxidative Stress Parameters in the Liver of Growing Male Rats Receiving Various Alcoholic Beverages. Nutrients 2020, 12, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Noeman, S.A.; Hamooda, H.E.; Baalash, A.A. Biochemical Study of Oxidative Stress Markers in the Liver, Kidney, and Heart of High Fat Diet-Induced Obesity in Rats. Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. 2011, 3, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Chen, L.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, W.; Han, H.; Yang, C.; Dong, X. Superoxide dismutase ameliorates oxidative stress and regulates liver transcriptomics to provide therapeutic benefits in hepatic inflammation. PeerJ 2023, 11, e15829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Arauz, J.; Ramos-Tovar, E.; Muriel, P. Redox State and Methods to Evaluate Oxidative Stress in Liver Damage: From Bench to Bedside. Ann. Hepatol. 2016, 15, 160–173. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  32. Miyata, T.; Kurokawa, K.; van Ypersele de Strihou, C. Relevance of Oxidative and Carbonyl Stress to Long-term Uremic Complications. Kidney Int. 2000, 76, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Van Den Branden, C.; Ceyssens, B.; De Craemer, D.; De Bleser, P.; Hellemans, K.; Geerts, A.; Verbeelen, D. Antioxidant Enzyme Gene Expression in Rats with Remnant Kidney Induced Chronic Renal failure. Exp. Nephrol. 2000, 8, 91–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Dávalos, L.M. Adapt or Live: Adaptation, Convergent Evolution, and Plesiomorphy. In Phyllostomid Bats: A Unique Mammalian Radiation; Fleming, T.H., Dávalos, L.M., Mello, M.A.R., Eds.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Cruz-Neto, A.P.; Herrera, L.G. The Relationship between Physiology and Diet. In Phyllostomid Bats: A Unique Mammalian Radiation; Fleming, T.H., Dávalos, L.M., Mello, M.A.R., Eds.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Saldaña-Vázquez, R.A.; Fleming, T.H. The Frugivores: Evolution, Functional Traits, and Their Role in Seed Dispersal. In Phyllostomid Bats: A Unique Mammalian Radiation; Fleming, T.H., Dávalos, L.M., Mello, M.A.R., Eds.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Brown, N.; Escobar, L.E. A Review of the Diet of the Common Vampire Bat (Desmodus rotundus) in the Context of Anthropogenic Change. Mamm. Biol. 2023, 103, 433–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Riskin, D.K.; Carter, G.G. The Evolution of Sanguivory in Vampire Bats: Origins and Convergences. Can. J. Zool. 2023, 101, 207–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Barros, M.A.S.; Pessoa, D.M.A.; Rui, A.M. Habitat Use and Seasonal Activity of Insectivorous Bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) in the Grasslands of Southern Brazil. Zoologia 2014, 31, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Frick, W.F.; Shipley, J.R.; Kelly, J.F.; Heady, P.A.; Kay, K.M. Seasonal Reliance on Nectar by an Insectivorous Bat Revealed by Stable Isotopes. Oecologia 2014, 174, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aliperti, J.R.; Kelt, D.A.; Heady, P.A.; Frick, W.F. Using Behavioral and Stable Isotope Data to Quantify Rare Dietary Plasticity in a Temperate Bat. J. Mammal. 2017, 98, 340–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Vallejo, N.; Aihartza, J.; Olasagasti, L.; Aldasoro, M.; Goiti, U.; Garin, I. Seasonal Shift in the Diet of the Notched-eared Bat (Myotis emarginatus) in the Basque Country: From Flies to Spiders. Mamm. Biol. 2023, 103, 419–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Rampelotto, P.H.; Giannakos, N.R.O.; Mena Canata, D.A.; Pereira, F.D.; Hackenhaar, F.S.; Pereira, M.J.R.; Benfato, M.S. Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defense in the Brain of Bat Species with Different Feeding Habits. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 12162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Racey, P.A. Ageing and Assessment of Reproductive Status of Pipistrelle bats, Pipistrellus pipistrellus. J. Zool. 1974, 173, 264–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Levine, R.L.; Garland, D.; Oliver, C.N.; Amici, A.; Climent, I.; Lenz, A.-G.; Ahn, B.-W.; Shaltiel, S.; Stadtman, E.R. Determination of Carbonyl Content in Oxidatively Modified Proteins. In Oxygen Radicals and Biological Systems Part B; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1990; pp. 464–478. [Google Scholar]
  46. Karatepe, M. Simultaneous Determination of Ascorbic Acid and Free Malondialdehyde in Human Serum by HPLC-UV. LC-GC N. Am. 2004, 22, 362–365. [Google Scholar]
  47. Mescam, M.; Vinnakota, K.C.; Beard, D.A. Identification of the Catalytic Mechanism and Estimation of Kinetic Parameters for Fumarase. J. Biol. Chem. 2011, 286, 21100–21109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Taniguchi, N.; Gutteridge, J. Experimental Protocols for Reactive Oxygen and Nitrogen Species, 1st ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  49. Li, Y.; Schellhorn, H.E. Rapid Kinetic Microassay for Catalase Activity. J. Biomol. Tech. 2007, 18, 185–187. [Google Scholar]
  50. Grisham, M.B.; Johnson, G.G.; Lancaster, J.R. Quantitation of Nitrate and Nitrite in Extracellular Fluids. In Nitric Oxide Part A Sources Detect. NO; NO Synthase; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1996; pp. 237–246. [Google Scholar]
  51. Rahman, I.; Kode, A.; Biswas, S.K. Assay for Quantitative Determination of Glutathione and Glutathione Disulfide Levels Using Enzymatic Recycling Method. Nat. Protoc. 2006, 1, 3159–3165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 24 16369 g001
Figure 1. Levels of oxidative damage markers measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. Data are presented as the median (interquartile range). Different letters indicate statistical differences among species (p < 0.05). The same letters correspond to no statistical differences (p > 0.05). The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S1.
Figure 1. Levels of oxidative damage markers measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. Data are presented as the median (interquartile range). Different letters indicate statistical differences among species (p < 0.05). The same letters correspond to no statistical differences (p > 0.05). The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S1.
Ijms 24 16369 g001
Ijms 24 16369 g002
Figure 2. The activity of antioxidant enzymes measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. (A) H2O2 consumption; (B) Superoxide dismutase; (C) Fumarase; (D) Glutathione peroxidase (E) Glutathione S-transferase. Data are presented as the median (interquartile range). Different letters indicate statistical differences among species (p < 0.05). The same letters correspond to no statistical differences (p > 0.05). The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S2.
Figure 2. The activity of antioxidant enzymes measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. (A) H2O2 consumption; (B) Superoxide dismutase; (C) Fumarase; (D) Glutathione peroxidase (E) Glutathione S-transferase. Data are presented as the median (interquartile range). Different letters indicate statistical differences among species (p < 0.05). The same letters correspond to no statistical differences (p > 0.05). The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S2.
Ijms 24 16369 g002
Ijms 24 16369 g003
Figure 3. Levels of non-enzymatic antioxidants measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. (A) Total Glutathione; (B) Oxidized Glutathione; (C) Reduced Glutathione; (D) GSSG/GSH; (E) Nitrites and Nitrates. Data are presented as the median (interquartile range). Different letters indicate statistical differences among species (p < 0.05). The same letters correspond to no statistical differences (p > 0.05). The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S3.
Figure 3. Levels of non-enzymatic antioxidants measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. (A) Total Glutathione; (B) Oxidized Glutathione; (C) Reduced Glutathione; (D) GSSG/GSH; (E) Nitrites and Nitrates. Data are presented as the median (interquartile range). Different letters indicate statistical differences among species (p < 0.05). The same letters correspond to no statistical differences (p > 0.05). The exact p-value of each analysis is presented in Table S3.
Ijms 24 16369 g003
Ijms 24 16369 g004
Figure 4. Principal component analysis of oxidative markers and (enzymatic and non-enzymatic) antioxidants measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. Numbers in blue indicate samples. (A) Heart; (B) liver; (C) kidney.
Figure 4. Principal component analysis of oxidative markers and (enzymatic and non-enzymatic) antioxidants measured in the heart, liver, and kidney of nectarivorous, frugivorous, insectivorous, and hematophagous bats. Numbers in blue indicate samples. (A) Heart; (B) liver; (C) kidney.
Ijms 24 16369 g004
Ijms 24 16369 g005
Figure 5. Graphical Spearman’s correlation matrix of oxidative markers and (enzymatic and non-enzymatic) antioxidants measured in this study. (A) Heart; (B) liver; (C) kidney. Positive correlation (from white to blue); negative correlation (from white to red). Only significant correlations are presented (p < 0.05). The exact p-value of each correlation is presented in Table S7 (heart), Table S8 (liver), and Table S9 (kidney). The circle size represents the correlation coefficient. H2O2↓ means hydrogen peroxide consumption.
Figure 5. Graphical Spearman’s correlation matrix of oxidative markers and (enzymatic and non-enzymatic) antioxidants measured in this study. (A) Heart; (B) liver; (C) kidney. Positive correlation (from white to blue); negative correlation (from white to red). Only significant correlations are presented (p < 0.05). The exact p-value of each correlation is presented in Table S7 (heart), Table S8 (liver), and Table S9 (kidney). The circle size represents the correlation coefficient. H2O2↓ means hydrogen peroxide consumption.
Ijms 24 16369 g005
Table 1. Biological data of each species, including feeding habits, body weight, and weight of each organ.
Table 1. Biological data of each species, including feeding habits, body weight, and weight of each organ.
Bat SpeciesFeeding HabitSeasonBody Weight (g)Heart (g)Liver (g)Kidneys (g)
Glossophaga soricinaNectarivorousAutumn (2019)16.81 ± 1.330.46 ± 0.070.34 ± 0.060.13 ± 0.01
Sturnira liliumFrugivorousWinter (2019)21.60 ± 1.570.41 ± 0.080.81 ± 0.110.29 ± 0.06
Molossus molossusInsectivorousSummer (2018)18.09 ± 1.800.41 ± 0.040.55 ± 0.050.14 ± 0.01
Desmodus rotundusHematophagousSummer (2018)40.85 ± 3.150.79 ± 0.181.84 ± 0.230.48 ± 0.04
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pereira, F.D.; Mena Canata, D.A.; Salomon, T.B.; Hackenhaar, F.S.; Pereira, M.J.R.; Benfato, M.S.; Rampelotto, P.H. Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defense in the Heart, Liver, and Kidney of Bat Species with Different Feeding Habits. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 16369. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242216369

AMA Style

Pereira FD, Mena Canata DA, Salomon TB, Hackenhaar FS, Pereira MJR, Benfato MS, Rampelotto PH. Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defense in the Heart, Liver, and Kidney of Bat Species with Different Feeding Habits. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(22):16369. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242216369

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pereira, Francielly Dias, Diego Antonio Mena Canata, Tiago Boeira Salomon, Fernanda Schäfer Hackenhaar, María João Ramos Pereira, Mara Silveira Benfato, and Pabulo Henrique Rampelotto. 2023. "Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defense in the Heart, Liver, and Kidney of Bat Species with Different Feeding Habits" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 22: 16369. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242216369

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop