4.3 Article

Temperature-induced reorganisation of Schistocephalus solidus (Cestoda) proteome during the transition to thewarm-blooded host

期刊

BIOLOGY OPEN
卷 10, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/bio.058719

关键词

Schistocephalus solidus; Proteome; Parasite; Cestoda; Plerocercoid

类别

资金

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [17-0401700]
  2. Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation [Goszadanie FZZE-2020-0026]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In a study on the cestode Schistocephalus solidus, the protein composition was measured under conditions simulating the parasite's transmission from a cold-blooded to a warm-blooded host. Results showed that key enzymes responsible for long-term metabolic changes in the parasite when colonizing a warm-blooded host are induced by temperature.
The protein composition of the cestode Schistocephalus solidus was measured in an experiment simulating the trophic transmission of the parasite from a cold-blooded to a warm-blooded host. The first hour of host colonisation was studied in a model experiment, in which sticklebacks Gasterosteus aculeatus infected with S. solidus were heated at 40 degrees C for 1 h. As a result, a decrease in the content of one tegument protein was detected in the plerocercoids of S. solidus. Sexual maturation of the parasites was initiated in an experiment where S. solidus larvae were taken from fish and cultured in vitro at 40 degrees C for 48 h. Temperature-independent changes in the parasite proteome were investigated by incubating plerocercoids at 22 degrees C for 48 h in culture medium. Analysis of the proteome allowed us to distinguish the temperature-induced genes of S. solidus, as well as to specify the molecular markers of the plerocercoid and adult worms. The main conclusion of the study is that the key enzymes of long-term metabolic changes (glycogen consumption, protein production, etc.) in parasites during colonisation of a warm-blooded host are induced by temperature.

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

4.3
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