3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Amphibian ( Xenopus laevis) Tadpoles and Adult Frogs Differ in Their Use of Expanded Repertoires of Type I and Type III Interferon Cytokines

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          While amphibians around the globe are facing catastrophic declines, in part because of infections with pathogens such as the Frog Virus 3 (FV3) ranavirus; the mechanisms governing amphibian susceptibility and resistance to such pathogens remain poorly understood. The type I and type III interferon (IFN) cytokines represent a cornerstone of vertebrate antiviral immunity, while our recent work indicates that tadpoles and adult frogs of the amphibian Xenopus laevis may differ in their IFN responses to FV3. In this respect, it is notable that anuran (frogs and toads) tadpoles are significantly more susceptible to FV3 than adult frogs, and thus, gaining greater insight into the differences in the tadpole and adult frog antiviral immunity would be invaluable. Accordingly, we examined the FV3-elicited expression of a panel of type I and type III IFN genes in the skin (site of FV3 infection) and kidney (principal FV3 target) tissues and isolated cells of X. laevis tadpoles and adult frogs. We also examined the consequence of tadpole and adult frog skin and kidney cell stimulation with hallmark pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) on the IFN responses of these cells. Together, our findings indicate that tadpoles and adult frogs mount drastically distinct IFN responses to FV3 as well as to viral and non-viral PAMPs, while these expression differences do not appear to be the result of a distinct pattern recognition receptor expression by tadpoles and adults.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Antiviral signaling through pattern recognition receptors.

          Viral infection is detected by the host innate immune system. Innate immune cells such as dendritic cells and macrophages detect nucleic acids derived from viruses through pattern recognition receptors (PRRs). Viral recognition by PRRs initiates the activation of signaling pathways that lead to production of type I interferon and inflammatory cytokines, which are important for the elimination of viruses. Two types of PRRs that recognize viral nucleic acids, Toll-like receptors (TLR) and RIG-I-like RNA helicases (RLH), have been identified. Of the TLRs, TLR3 recognizes viral double-stranded (ds) RNA, TLR7 and human TLR8 identify viral single-stranded (ss) RNA and TLR9 detects viral DNA. TLRs are located in endosomal compartments, whereas RLH are present in the cytoplasm where they detect viral dsRNA or ssRNA. Here we review the role of TLRs and RLHs in the antiviral innate immune response.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The interferon system of teleost fish.

            Interferons (IFNs) are secreted proteins, which induce vertebrate cells into an antiviral state. In mammals, three families of IFNs (type I IFN, type II IFN and IFN-lambda) can be distinguished on the basis of gene structure, protein structure and functional properties. Type I IFNs, which include IFN-alpha and IFN-beta, are encoded by intron lacking genes and have a major role in the first line of defense against viruses. The human IFN-lambdas have similar biological properties as type I IFNs, but are encoded by intron containing genes. Type II IFN is identical to IFN-gamma, which is produced by T helper 1 cells in response to mitogens and antigens and has a key role in adaptive cell mediated immunity. IFNs, which show structural and functional properties similar to mammalian type I IFNs, have recently been cloned from Atlantic salmon, channel catfish, pufferfish, and zebrafish. Teleost fish appear to have at least two type I IFN genes. Phylogenetic sequence analysis shows that the fish type I IFNs form a group separated from the avian type I IFNs and the mammalian IFN-alpha, -beta and -lambda groups. Interestingly, the fish IFNs possess the same exon/intron structure as the IFN-lambdas, but show most sequence similarity to IFN-alpha. Recently, IFN-gamma genes have also been cloned from several fish species and shown to have the same exon/intron structure as mammalian IFN-gamma genes. The antiviral effect of mammalian type I IFN is exerted through binding to the IFN-alpha/beta-receptor, which triggers signal transduction through the JAK-STAT signal transduction pathway resulting in expression of Mx and other antiviral proteins. Putative IFN receptor genes have been identified in pufferfish. Several interferon regulatory factors and members of the JAK-STAT pathway have also been identified in various fish species. Moreover, Mx and several other interferon stimulated genes have been cloned and studied in fish. Furthermore, antiviral activity of Mx protein from Atlantic salmon and Japanese flounder has recently been demonstrated.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evolution of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) recognition and signaling: fish TLR4 does not recognize LPS and negatively regulates NF-kappaB activation.

              It has long been established that lower vertebrates, most notably fish and amphibians, are resistant to the toxic effect of LPS. Furthermore, the lack of a TLR4 ortholog in some fish species and the lack of the essential costimulatory molecules for LPS activation via TLR4 (i.e., myeloid differentiation protein 2 (MD-2) and CD14) in all the fish genomes and expressed sequence tag databases available led us to hypothesize that the mechanism of LPS recognition in fish may be different from that of mammals. To shed light on the role of fish TLRs in LPS recognition, a dual-luciferase reporter assay to study NF-kappaB activation in whole zebrafish embryos was developed and three different bony fish models were studied: 1) the gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata, Perciformes), an immunological-tractable teleost model in which the presence of a TLR4 ortholog is unknown; 2) the spotted green pufferfish (Tetraodon nigroviridis, Tetraodontiformes), which lacks a TLR4 ortholog; and 3) the zebrafish (Danio rerio, Cypriniformes), which possesses two TLR4 orthologs. Our results show that LPS signaled via a TLR4- and MyD88-independent manner in fish, and, surprisingly, that the zebrafish TLR4 orthologs negatively regulated the MyD88-dependent signaling pathway. We think that the identification of TLR4 as a negative regulator of TLR signaling in the zebrafish, together with the absence of this receptor in most fish species, explains the resistance of fish to endotoxic shock and supports the idea that the TLR4 receptor complex for LPS recognition arose after the divergence of fish and tetrapods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Viruses
                Viruses
                viruses
                Viruses
                MDPI
                1999-4915
                17 July 2018
                July 2018
                : 10
                : 7
                : 372
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biological Sciences, George Washington University, 800 22nd St NW, Suite 6000, Washington, DC 20052, USA; emilywendel@ 123456gwu.edu (E.S.W.); ayap@ 123456gwu.edu (A.Y.); daphnevk@ 123456gwu.edu (D.V.K.)
                [2 ]School Without Walls High School, Washington, DC 20052, USA; mattie.melnyk@ 123456gmail.com
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: leon_grayfer@ 123456gwu.edu ; Tel.: +1-202-994-8076
                Article
                viruses-10-00372
                10.3390/v10070372
                6070924
                30018186
                1a6ec8a2-3fd8-4108-b04b-4cde76cdbc8d
                © 2018 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 03 May 2018
                : 07 July 2018
                Categories
                Article

                Microbiology & Virology
                amphibian,interferon,ifn,fv3,antiviral
                Microbiology & Virology
                amphibian, interferon, ifn, fv3, antiviral

                Comments

                Comment on this article