School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
PLoS One. 2011;6(9):e25430. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025430. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
The outcome of microbial infection of insects is dependent not only on interactions between the host and pathogen, but also on the interactions between microbes that co-infect the host. Recently the maternally inherited endosymbiotic bacteria Wolbachia has been shown to protect insects from a range of microbial and eukaryotic pathogens. Mosquitoes experimentally infected with Wolbachia have upregulated immune responses and are protected from a number of pathogens including viruses, bacteria, Plasmodium and filarial nematodes. It has been hypothesised that immune upregulation underpins Wolbachia-mediated protection. Drosophila is a strong model for understanding host-Wolbachia-pathogen interactions. Wolbachia-mediated antiviral protection in Drosophila has been demonstrated for a number of different Wolbachia strains. In this study we investigate whether Wolbachia-infected flies are also protected against pathogenic bacteria. Drosophila simulans lines infected with five different Wolbachia strains were challenged with the pathogenic bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA01, Serratia marcescens and Erwinia carotovora and mortality compared to paired lines without Wolbachia. No difference in mortality was observed in the flies with or without Wolbachia. Similarly no antibacterial protection was observed for D. melanogaster infected with Wolbachia. Interestingly, D. melanogaster Oregon RC flies which are naturally infected with Wolbachia showed no upregulation of the antibacterial immune genes TepIV, Defensin, Diptericin B, PGRP-SD, Cecropin A1 and Attacin D compared to paired flies without Wolbachia. Taken together these results indicate that Wolbachia-mediated antibacterial protection is not ubiquitous in insects and furthermore that the mechanisms of antibacterial and antiviral protection are independent. We suggest that the immune priming and antibacterial protection observed in Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes may be a consequence of the recent artificial introduction of the symbiont into insects that normally do not carry Wolbachia and that antibacterial protection is unlikely to be found in insects carrying long-term Wolbachia infections.
昆虫的微生物感染的结果不仅取决于宿主和病原体之间的相互作用,还取决于共同感染宿主的微生物之间的相互作用。最近,已证明母体遗传的共生细菌沃尔巴克氏体 (Wolbachia) 可以保护昆虫免受多种微生物和真核病原体的侵害。实验感染沃尔巴克氏体的蚊子上调了免疫反应,并受到多种病原体的保护,包括病毒、细菌、疟原虫和丝虫。人们假设免疫上调是沃尔巴克氏体介导的保护的基础。果蝇是理解宿主-沃尔巴克氏体-病原体相互作用的有力模型。已经证明,对于许多不同的沃尔巴克氏体菌株,果蝇中存在沃尔巴克氏体介导的抗病毒保护。在这项研究中,我们研究了感染沃尔巴克氏体的果蝇是否也能抵抗致病性细菌。用五种不同的沃尔巴克氏体菌株感染的 Drosophila simulans 品系受到了致病性细菌 Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA01、Serratia marcescens 和 Erwinia carotovora 的挑战,并与没有沃尔巴克氏体的配对品系进行了比较。在有或没有沃尔巴克氏体的果蝇中,死亡率没有差异。同样,感染沃尔巴克氏体的 D. melanogaster 也没有观察到抗菌保护。有趣的是,与没有沃尔巴克氏体的配对果蝇相比,自然感染沃尔巴克氏体的 D. melanogaster Oregon RC 果蝇没有上调抗菌免疫基因 TepIV、Defensin、Diptericin B、PGRP-SD、Cecropin A1 和 Attacin D。总之,这些结果表明,沃尔巴克氏体介导的抗菌保护在昆虫中并非普遍存在,此外,抗菌和抗病毒保护的机制是独立的。我们认为,在感染沃尔巴克氏体的蚊子中观察到的免疫启动和抗菌保护可能是该共生体最近人工引入通常不携带沃尔巴克氏体的昆虫的结果,并且不太可能在携带长期沃尔巴克氏体感染的昆虫中发现抗菌保护。