4.7 Article

Temperature dependent virulence of obligate and facultative fungal pathogens of honeybee brood

期刊

VETERINARY MICROBIOLOGY
卷 149, 期 1-2, 页码 200-205

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2010.10.001

关键词

Apis mellifera; Aspergillus; Ascosphaera; Host-pathogen interactions; Temperature; Virulence

资金

  1. Danish National Research Foundation
  2. Faculty of Life Sciences of the University of Copenhagen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chalkbrood (Ascosphaera apis) and stonebrood (Aspergillus flavus) are well known fungal brood diseases of honeybees (Apis mellifera), but they have hardly been systematically studied because the difficulty of rearing larvae in vitro has precluded controlled experimentation. Chalkbrood is a chronic honeybee-specific disease that can persist in colonies for years, reducing both brood and honey production, whereas stonebrood is a rare facultative pathogen that also affects hosts other than honeybees and can likely survive outside insect hosts. Hive infection trials have indicated that accidental drops in comb temperature increase the prevalence of chalkbrood, but it has remained unclear whether virulence is directly temperature-dependent. We used a newly established in vitro rearing technique for honeybee larvae to test whether there are systematic temperature effects on mortality induced by controlled infections, and whether such effects differed between the two fungal pathogens. We found that increasing spore dosage at infection had a more dramatic effect on mortality from stonebrood compared to chalkbrood. In addition, a 24 h cooling period after inoculation increased larval mortality from chalkbrood infection, whereas such a cooling period decreased mortality after stonebrood infection. These results raise interesting questions about honeybee defenses against obligate and facultative pathogens and about the extent to which stress factors in the host (dis)favor pathogens with lesser degrees of specialization. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据