4.5 Article

Galleria mellonella as an infection model to investigate virulence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus

期刊

VIRULENCE
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 197-207

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/21505594.2017.1384895

关键词

Vibrio parahaemolyticus; nudix hydrolase; MutT; Galleria mellonella

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund [WT097835MF]
  2. Wellcome Trust Multi User Equipment Award [WT097835MF]
  3. Medical Research Council Clinical Infrastructure Funding [MR/M008924/1]
  4. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) funding [BB/N016513/1]
  5. BBSRC [BB/N016513/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. MRC [MR/M008924/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/N016513/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. Medical Research Council [MR/M008924/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-toxigenic V. parahaemolyticus isolates (tdh(-)/trh(-)/T3SS2(-)) have recently been isolated from patients with gastroenteritis. In this study we report that the larvae of the wax moth (Galleria mellonella) are susceptible to infection by toxigenic or non-toxigenic clinical isolates of V. parahaemolyticus. In comparison larvae inoculated with environmental isolates of V. parahaemolyticus did not succumb to disease. Whole genome sequencing of clinical non-toxigenic isolates revealed the presence of a gene encoding a nudix hydrolase, identified as mutT. A V. parahaemolyticus mutT mutant was unable to kill G. mellonella at 24 h post inoculation, indicating a role of this gene in virulence. Our findings show that G. mellonella is a valuable model for investigating screening of possible virulence genes of V. parahaemolyticus and can provide new insights into mechanisms of virulence of atypical non-toxigenic V. parahaemolyticus. These findings will allow improved genetic tests for the identification of pathogenic V. parahaemolyticus to be developed and will have a significant impact for the scientific community.

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

4.5
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