Proteomic dynamics in endochondral ossification: insights from antler tip analysis


Abstract

The antler primary growth center is located in the distal tip of the growing antler with five consecutive tissue layers under the velvet skin. Because of blastema progenitor cells of the outermost reserve mesenchymal layer with multipotent differentiation capacity, antler regeneration recapitulates embryonic skeletal development through the endochondral ossification (ECO) process. However, the precise molecular mechanism governing cell fate decisions and tissue morphogenesis across the antler growth center remains incompletely understood. To further decipher this modified endochondral ossification from the perspective of proteome dynamics, we first profile the deer antler proteome atlas with 8,173 proteins, covering the whole five layers that comprehensively represent the mesenchymal condensation, rapid mesenchymal proliferation, chondrocyte hypertrophy, and cartilage mineralization. By integrating three clustering methods, including WGCNA, Fuzzy C-means clustering, and monotonic feature selector, we elucidate proteome dynamics within the growth center, identifying key factors and elucidating biological processes through GO enrichment analysis. Integrated clustering analyses revealed distinct protein expression modules corresponding to the sequential stages of ECO. Proteins highly expressed in the RM layer were significantly enriched in processes related to mesenchymal cell proliferation and stemness. The transition to PC and CA zones was marked by a coordinated upregulation of proteins involved in extracellular matrix organization, collagen fibril assembly, and chondrocyte differentiation. In the MC layer, we observed an enrichment of proteins associated with cartilage mineralization and chondrocyte hypertrophy. Notably, our deep proteomic approach enabled the identification of low-abundance regulatory proteins, including key chondrogenic transcription factors such as SOX9, SOX6, and RUNX3, whose expression patterns correlated precisely with their expected roles in chondrogenesis. Furthermore, we identified a unique signature of 11 embryonic and 23 mesenchymal stem cell markers in the RM layer, suggesting a distinct intermediate stem cell state driving regeneration. Comparative analysis with existing transcriptomic data revealed that mRNA levels exhibit greater fluctuation than their corresponding protein abundances, highlighting the critical role of post-transcriptional regulation in orchestrating the smooth progression of ECO. This study provides the most comprehensive, spatially resolved proteomic resource for the deer antler growth center to date. Our findings delineate a precise spatiotemporal cascade of protein dynamics that governs the entire endochondral ossification process, from progenitor cell proliferation to terminal mineralization. The identification of key regulatory hubs and the evidence for significant post-transcriptional control offer new insights into bone development.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].