Pre-exposure to non-pathogenic bacteria does not protect Drosophila against the entomopathogenic bacterium Photorhabdus

Drosophila melanogaster as a model to study innate immune memory

Over the last decades, research regarding innate immune responses has gained increasing importance. A growing body of evidence supports the notion that the innate arm of the immune system could show memory traits. Such traits are thought to be conserved throughout evolution and provide a survival advantage. Several models are available to study these mechanisms. Among them, we find the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. This non-mammalian model has been widely used for innate immune research since it naturally lacks an adaptive response. Here, we aim to review the latest advances in the study of the memory mechanisms of the innate immune response using this animal model.

Efficient Oral Priming of Tenebrio molitor Larvae Using Heat-Inactivated Microorganisms

Microbial resistance is a global health problem that will increase over time. Advances in insect antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) offer a powerful new approach to combat antimicrobial resistance. Invertebrates represent a rich group of animals for the discovery of new antimicrobial agents due to their high diversity and the presence of adaptive immunity or “immune priming”. Here, we report a priming approach for Tenebrio molitor that simulates natural infection via the oral route. This oral administration has the advantage of minimizing the stress caused by conventional priming techniques and could be a viable method for mealworm immunity studies. When using inactivated microorganisms for oral priming, our results showed an increased survival of T. molitor larvae after exposure to various pathogens. This finding was consistent with the induction of antimicrobial activity in the hemolymph of primed larvae. Interestingly, the hemolymph of larvae orally primed with Escherichia coli showed constitutive activity against Staphylococcus aureus and heterologous activity for other Gram-negative bacteria, such as Salmonella enterica. The priming of T. molitor is generally performed via injection of the microorganism. To our knowledge, this is the first report describing the oral administration of heat-inactivated microorganisms for priming mealworms. This technique has the advantage of reducing the stress that occurs with the conventional methods for priming vertebrates.

Antimicrobial peptide expression in the cockroach gut during enterobacterial infection is specific and influenced by type III secretion

Omnivorous synanthropic cockroaches, such as the German cockroach (Blattella germanica), are reservoirs and vectors of enteric bacterial pathogens. A lifestyle conducive to frequent encounters with high loads of diverse bacteria may have led to the evolution of unique innate immune systems in these insects. The innate immune response of insects relies largely on generalized mechanisms to sense and eliminate foreign microbes. However, analyses of the genomes of common synanthropic cockroaches previously revealed a repertoire of pathogen associated molecular pattern (PAMP) receptors and antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) that is significantly expanded relative to most holometabolous insect models and vectors, supporting the intriguing possibility that cockroaches may encode enhanced recognition within their immune system and may possess an enhanced capacity to fine tune innate immune responses. Investigating how cockroaches respond to infection with enterobacteria provides the opportunity to expand our fundamental knowledge of the regulation of insect innate immunity in a context that is biologically and medically relevant. German cockroaches can harbor both Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium and Escherichia coli in their gut without experiencing pathogenesis. The former colonizes the gut and replicates while the latter persists only transiently. We hypothesized that differences in the innate immune response may contribute to or result from the difference in infection dynamics between the two enterobacteria. To test this hypothesis, we used qRT-PCR to analyze expression of five genes encoding representative AMPs (Attacins, Blattellicin, Defensins) in the gut of German cockroaches 1 and 24 h after ingestion of live or heat-killed enterobacteria. We found that robust AMP expression was induced in response to ingestion of a live wild-type strain of S. Typhimurium, but not in response to live E. coli, heat-killed S. Typhimurium, or a live mutant strain of S. Typhimurium lacking type III secretion systems. These results indicate that the cockroach immune system does not respond to stimulation with high levels of ingested bacterial PAMPs such as peptidoglycan. Rather, AMP expression in the gut appears to be induced by active bacterial colonization involving type III secretion. We speculate that this form of regulation may have evolved to prevent over activation of the immune system from frequent ingestion of innocuous, non-colonizing, or non-viable bacteria. While additional work is needed to delineate the molecular mechanisms underlying our observations, our findings provide significant novel insight into the immunological adaptation of cockroaches to life in septic environments as well as the factors that regulate bacterial pathogen transmission by these insects.

Host Resistance to Bacterial Infection Varies Over Time, but Is Not Affected by a Previous Exposure to the Same Pathogen

Immune priming describes the phenomenon whereby after a primary pathogen exposure, a host more effectively fights a lethal secondary exposure (challenge) to the same pathogen. Conflicting evidence exists for immune priming in invertebrates, potentially due to heterogeneity across studies in the pathogen species tested, the antigen preparation for the primary exposure, and the phenotypic trait used to test for priming. To explore these factors, we injected Drosophila melanogaster with one of two bacterial species, Lactococcus lactis or Providencia burhodogranariea, which had either been heat-killed or inactivated with formaldehyde, or we injected a 1:1 mixture of the two inactivation methods. Survival and resistance (the inverse of bacterial load) were assessed after a live bacterial challenge. In contrast to our predictions, none of the primary exposure treatments provided a survival benefit after challenge compared to the controls. Resistance in the acute phase, i.e., 1 day post-challenge, separated into a lower- and higher-load group, however, neither group varied according to the primary exposure. In the chronic phase, i.e., 7 days post-challenge, resistance did not separate into two groups, and it was also unaffected by the primary exposure. Our multi-angled study supports the view that immune priming may require specific circumstances to occur, rather than it being a ubiquitous aspect of insect immunity.

Bacillus subtilis and B. licheniformis Isolated from Heterorhabditis indica Infected Apple Root Borer (Dorysthenes huegelii) Suppresses Nematode Production in Galleria mellonella

PURPOSE

Heterorhabdits indica successfully controlled apple root borer Dorysthenes huegelii in the orchards, but nematode-infected cadavers revealed the presence of non-symbiotic bacterial B. subtilis and B. licheniformis, and no subsequent generations of H. indica were produced (hampered recycling phenomenon). Intrigued, we tested the effect of the two Bacillus species on symbiotic association of H. indica-Photorhabdus luminescens.

METHODS

One-to-one competitive parallel line in vitro assays were carried out between P. luminescens and the two Bacillus spp., while in vivo H. indica development was studied on the test insect Galleria mellonella which were fed with Bacillus mixed diet, followed by nematode exposure.

RESULTS

Where P. luminescens was flanked by either of the two Bacillus species, only B. subtilis significantly suppressed its growth, while in reversed assays both the Bacillus growth was unaffected. Heterorhabditis indica was able to kill Galleria larvae pre-fed with the two Bacillus spp.; these cadavers did not develop the characteristic evenly distributed brick red coloration. Besides P. luminesecns, both Bacillus spp. were found to coexist in these cadavers. Development of hermaphrodites was not affected, but second-generation females, and final nematode progeny was reduced significantly. Monozenic lawns of B. subtilis and B. licheniformis did not support H. indica development.

CONCLUSION

These results show the reduced development of H. indica by the presence of the non-symbiotic bacteria in G. mellonella is likely to affect their ability to recycle in other insect larvae. Reduced recycling caused by non-symbiotic bacteria will reduce the overall long-term pest control benefits and have implications in the development of application strategies using entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs) as insect control agents.

Immune priming against bacteria in spiders and scorpions?

Empirical evidence of immune priming in arthropods keeps growing, both at the within- and trans-generational level. The evidence comes mostly from work on insects and it remains unclear for some other arthropods whether exposure to a non-lethal dose of a pathogen provides protection during a second exposure with a lethal dose. A poorly investigated group are arachnids, with regard to the benefits of immune priming measured as improved survival. Here, we investigated immune priming in two arachnids: the wolf spider Lycosa cerrofloresiana and the scorpion Centruroides granosus. We injected a third of the individuals with lipopolysaccharides of Escherichia coli (LPS, an immune elicitor), another third were injected with the control solution (PBS) and the other third were kept naive. Four days after the first inoculations, we challenged half of the individuals of each group with an injection of a high dose of E. coli and the other half was treated with the control solution. For scorpions, individuals that were initially injected with PBS or LPS did not differ in their survival rates against the bacterial challenge. Individuals injected with LPS showed higher survival than that of naive individuals as evidence of immune priming. Individuals injected with PBS tended to show higher survival rates than naive individuals, but the difference was not significant—perhaps suggesting a general immune upregulation caused by the wounding done by the needle. For spiders, we did not observe evidence of priming, the bacterial challenge reduced the survival of naive, PBS and LPS individuals at similar rates. Moreover; for scorpions, we performed antibacterial assays of hemolymph samples from the three priming treatments (LPS, PBS and naive) and found that the three treatments reduced bacterial growth but without differences among treatments. As non-model organisms, with some unique differences in their immunological mechanisms as compared to the most studied arthropods (insects), arachnids provide an unexplored field to elucidate the evolution of immune systems.

Adult Mosquitoes Infected with Bacteria Early in Life Have Stronger Antimicrobial Responses and More Hemocytes after Reinfection Later in Life

The immunological strategies employed by insects to overcome infection vary with the type of infection and may change with experience. We investigated how a bacterial infection in the hemocoel of the African malaria mosquito, Anopheles gambiae, prepares the immune system to face a subsequent bacterial infection. For this, adult female mosquitoes were separated into three groups—unmanipulated, injured, or infected with Escherichia coli—and five days later all the mosquitoes were infected with a different strain of E. coli. We found that an injury or a bacterial infection early in life enhances the ability of mosquitoes to kill bacteria later in life. This protection results in higher mosquito survival and is associated with an increased hemocyte density, altered phagocytic activity by individual hemocytes, and the increased expression of nitric oxide synthase and perhaps prophenoloxidase 6. Protection from a second infection likely occurs because of heightened immune awareness due to an already existing infection instead of memory arising from an earlier, cured infection. This study highlights the dynamic nature of the mosquito immune response and how one infection prepares mosquitoes to survive a subsequent infection.