4.8 Article

Protozoan predation, diversifying selection, and the evolution of antigenic diversity in Salmonella

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0404028101

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extensive population-level genetic variability at the Salmonella rfb locus, which encodes enzymes responsible for synthesis of the O-antigen polysaccharicle, is thought to have arisen through frequency-dependent selection (FDS) by means of exposure of this pathogen to host immune systems. The FDS hypothesis works well for pathogens such as Haemophilus influenzae and Neisseria meningitis, which alter the composition of their O-antigens during the course of bloodborne infections. In contrast, Salmonella remains resident in epithelial cells or macrophages during infection and does not have phase variability in its O-antigen. More importantly, Salmonella shows host-serovar specificity, whereby strains bearing certain O-antigens cause disease primarily in specific hosts; this behavior is inconsistent with FDS providing selection for the origin or maintenance of extensive polymorphism at the rfb locus. Alternatively, selective pressure may originate from the host intestinal environment itself, wherein diversifying selection mediated by protozoan predation allows for the continued existence of Salmonella able to avoid consumption by host-specific protozoa. This selective pressure would result in high population-level diversity at the Salmonella rfb locus without phase variation. We show here that intestinal protozoa recognize antigenically diverse Salmonella with different efficiencies and demonstrate that differences solely in the O-antigen are sufficient to allow for prey discrimination. Combined with observations of the differential distributions of both serotypes of bacterial species and their protozoan predators among environments, our data provides a framework for the evolution of high genetic diversity at the rfb locus and host-specific pathogenicity in Salmonella.

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

4.8
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