4.7 Article

Chitosan nanoparticles: A positive immune response modulator as display in zebrafish larvae against Aeromonas hydrophila infection

期刊

FISH & SHELLFISH IMMUNOLOGY
卷 76, 期 -, 页码 240-246

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsi.2018.03.010

关键词

Chitosan nanoparticles; Zebrafish larvae; Immune response; Aeromonas hydrophila

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant - Korean government (MSIT) [2017010990]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chitosan nanoparticles (CNPs) were synthesized by ionic gelation method and its immunomodulatory properties were investigated in zebrafish larvae. Average particle size and zeta potential were 181.2 nm and + 37.2 my, respectively. Initially, toxicity profile was tested in zebrafish embryo at 96 h post fertilization (hpf) stage using medium molecular weight chitosan (MMW-C) and CNPs. At 5 mu g/mL, the hatching rate was almost similar in both treatments, however, the survival rate was lower in MMW-C compared to GNPs exposure, suggesting that toxicity effect of CNPs in hatched larvae was minimal at 5 mu g/mL compared to MMW-C. Quantitative real time PCR results showed that in CNPs exposed larvae at 5 days post fertilization (5 dpf) stage, immune related (il-1 beta, tnf-alpha, it-6, il-10, cxcl-18b, cc134a.4, cxcl-8a, lyz-c, def beta l-1, irf-1a, irf-3, MxA) and stress response (hsp-70) genes were induced. In contrast, basal or down regulated expression of antioxidant genes (gstp-1, cat, sod-1, prdx-4, txndr-1) were observed. Moreover, zebrafish larvae (at 5 dpf stage) exposed to CNPs (5 mu g/mL) showed higher survival rate at 72 h post infection stage against pathogenic Aeromonas hydrophila challenge compared to controls. These results suggest that although CNPs can have toxic effects to the larvae at higher doses, CNPs exposure at 5 mu g/mL could enhance the immune responses and develop the disease resistance against A. hydrophila, which could be attributed to its strong immune modulatory properties.

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