4.5 Article

Population trends associated with skin peptide defenses against chytridiomycosis in Australian frogs

期刊

OECOLOGIA
卷 146, 期 4, 页码 531-540

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00442-005-0228-8

关键词

amphibian; antimicrobial peptide; Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis; immune defense; population decline; skin

类别

资金

  1. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [T32HL069765] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [5 T32 HL069765-02] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many species of amphibians in the wet tropics of Australia have experienced population declines linked with the emergence of a skin-invasive chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis. An innate defense, antimicrobial peptides produced by granular glands in the skin, may protect some species from disease. Here we present evidence that supports this hypothesis. We tested ten synthesized peptides produced by Australian species, and natural peptide mixtures from five Queensland rainforest species. Natural mixtures and most peptides tested in isolation inhibited growth of B. dendrobatidis in vitro. The three most active peptides (caerin 1.9, maculatin 1.1, and caerin 1.1) were found in the secretions of non-declining species (Litoria chloris, L. caerulea, and L. genimaculata). Although the possession of a potent isolated antimicrobial peptide does not guarantee protection from infection, non-declining species (L. lesueuri and L. genimaculata) inhabiting the rainforest of Queensland possess mixtures of peptides that may be more protective than those of the species occurring in the same habitat that have recently experienced population declines associated with chytridiomycosis (L. nannotis, L. rheocola, and Nyctimystes dayi). This study demonstrates that in vitro effectiveness of skin peptides correlates with the degree of decline in the face of an emerging pathogen. Further research is needed to assess whether this non-specific immune defense may be useful in predicting disease susceptibility in other species.

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