Integrated transcriptomic and metabolomic analyses reveal low-temperature tolerance mechanism in giant freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii

Table S1: Primers of RT-qPCR validation.

Table S2. Sequencing output statistics for each sample under low-temperature stress.

Table S3. Splicing information of M. rosenbergii under low-temperature stress.

Table S4. Annotation results for transcriptome of M. rosenbergii under low-temperature stress.

Table S5: Key DEGs selected in lipid and energy metabolism for three comparison groups, Three comparison group included LS vs. Con, LT vs. Con, LT vs. LS.

Table S6: Key DMs selected in lipid and energy metabolism for three comparison groups, Three comparison group included LS vs. Con, LT vs. Con, LT vs. LS.

Figure S1: GO enrichment map of M. rosenbergii transcriptome under low-temperature stress, (A) LS vs. Con, (B) LT vs. Con, (C) LT vs. LS.

Figure S2: Analysis of quality control of metabolome of M. rosenbergii under low-temperature stress, (A) Pearson analysis in positive mode, (B) Pearson analysis in negative mode, (C) Variation analysis in the positive mode, (D) Variation analysis in the negative mode, (E) PCA analysis in positive mode, (F) PCA analysis in negative modes.

Figure S3: PCA analysis of metabolic group of M. rosenbergii under low-temperature stress, (A) LS vs. Con in positive mode, (B) LS vs. Con in negative mode, (C) LT vs. Con in positive mode, (D) LT vs. Con in negative mode, (E) LT vs. LS in positive mode, (F) LT vs. LS in negative mode.

Figure S4: KEGG enrichment analysis of M. rosenbergii under low-temperature stress, ((A) LS vs. Con in positive mode, (B) LS vs. Con in negative mode, (C) LT vs. Con in positive mode, (D) LT vs. Con in negative mode, (E) LT vs. LS in positive mode, (F) LT vs. LS in negative mode.

Figure S5: RT-qPCR validation of DEGs of M. rosenbergii under low-temperature stress.