Single-nucleus transcriptomics reveal the cytological mechanism of conjugated linoleic acids in regulating intramuscular fat deposition

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Summary:

The authors aimed to elucidate the cytological mechanisms by which conjugated linoleic acids (CLAs) influence intramuscular fat deposition and muscle fiber transformation in pig models. Utilizing single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq), the study explores how CLA supplementation alters cell populations, muscle fiber types, and adipocyte differentiation pathways in pig skeletal muscles.

Strengths:

Innovative approach: The use of snRNA-seq provides a high-resolution insight into the cellular heterogeneity of pig skeletal muscle, enhancing our understanding of the intricate cellular dynamics influenced by nutritional regulation strategy.

Robust validation: The study utilizes multiple pig models, including Heigai and Laiwu pigs, to validate the differentiation trajectories of adipocytes and the effects of CLA on muscle fiber type transformation. The reproducibility of these findings across different (nutritional vs genetic) models enhances the reliability of the results.

Advanced data analysis: The integration of pseudotemporal trajectory analysis and cell-cell communication analysis allows for a comprehensive understanding of the functional implications of the cellular changes observed.

Practical relevance: The findings have significant implications for improving meat quality, which is valuable for both the agricultural and food industry.

Weaknesses:

Model generalizability: While pigs are excellent models for human physiology, the translation of these findings to human health, especially in diverse populations, needs careful consideration.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:

This study comprehensively presents data from single nuclei sequencing of Heigai pig skeletal muscle in response to conjugated linoleic acid supplementation. The authors identify changes in myofiber type and adipocyte subpopulations induced by linoleic acid at depth previously unobserved. The authors show that linoleic acid supplementation decreased the total myofiber count, specifically reducing type II muscle fiber types (IIB), myotendinous junctions, and neuromuscular junctions, whereas type I muscle fibers are increased. Moreover, the authors identify changes in adipocyte pools, specifically in a population marked by SCD1/DGAT2. To validate the skeletal muscle remodeling in response to linoleic acid supplementation, the authors compare transcriptomics data from Laiwu pigs, a model of high intramuscular fat, to Heigai pigs. The results verify changes in adipocyte subpopulations when pigs have higher intramuscular fat, either genetically or diet-induced. Targeted examination using cell-cell communication network analysis revealed associations with high intramuscular fat with fibro-adipogenic progenitors (FAPs). The authors then conclude that conjugated linoleic acid induces FAPs towards adipogenic commitment. Specifically, they show that linoleic acid stimulates FAPs to become SCD1/DGAT2+ adipocytes via JNK signaling. The authors conclude that their findings demonstrate the effects of conjugated linoleic acid on skeletal muscle fat formation in pigs, which could serve as a model for studying human skeletal muscle diseases.

Strengths:

The comprehensive data analysis provides information on conjugated linoleic acid effects on pig skeletal muscle and organ function. The notion that linoleic acid induces skeletal muscle composition and fat accumulation is considered a strength and demonstrates the effect of dietary interactions on organ remodeling. This could have implications for the pig farming industry to promote muscle marbling. Additionally, these data may inform the remodeling of human skeletal muscle under dietary behaviors, such as elimination and supplementation diets and chronic overnutrition of nutrient-poor diets. However, the biggest strength resides in thorough data collection at the single nuclei level, which was extrapolated to other types of Chinese pigs.

Weaknesses:

While the authors generated a sizeable comprehensive dataset, cellular and molecular validation needed to be improved. For example, the single nuclei data suggest changes in myofiber type after linoleic acid supplementation, yet these data are not validated by other methodologies. Similarly, the authors suggest that linoleic acid alters adipocyte populations, FAPs, and preadipocytes; however, no cellular and molecular analysis was performed to reveal if these trajectories indeed apply. Attempts to identify JNK signaling pathways appear superficial and do not delve deeper into mechanistic action or transcriptional regulation. Notably, a variety of single cell studies have been performed on mouse/human skeletal muscle and adipose tissues. Yet, the authors need to discuss how the populations they have identified support the existing literature on cell-type populations in skeletal muscle. Moreover, the authors nicely incorporate the two pig models into their results, but the authors only examine one muscle group. It would be interesting if other muscle groups respond similarly or differently in response to linoleic acid supplementation. Further, it was unclear whether Heigai and Laiwu pigs were both fed conjugated linoleic acid or whether the comparison between Heigai-fed linoleic acid and Laiwu pigs (as a model of high intramuscular fat). With this in mind, the authors do not discuss how their results could be implicated in human and pig nutrition, such as desirability and cost-effectiveness for pig farmers and human diets high in linoleic acid. Notably, while single nuclei data is comprehensive, there needs to be a statement on data deposition and code availability, allowing others access to these datasets. Moreover, the experimental designs do not denote the conjugated linoleic acid supplementation duration. Several immunostainings performed could be quantified to validate statements. This reviewer also found the Nile Red staining hard to interpret visually and did not appear to support the conclusions convincingly. Within Figure 7, several letters (assuming they represent statistical significance) are present on the graphs but are not denoted within the figure legend.