4.6 Article

Comparison of the proliferation and excretion of Bartonella quintana between body and head lice following oral challenge

Journal

INSECT MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages 266-276

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/imb.12292

Keywords

human lice; body louse; head louse; trench fever; Bartonella quintana; immune response; reactive oxygen species; alimentary tract; bacterial challenge

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease [5R01AI045062-06]
  2. Brain Korea 21 program
  3. NIH/NIAID [R01AI103299, 5R01AI052813]
  4. California HIV Research Program Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human body and head lice are highly related haematophagous ectoparasites but only the body louse has been shown to transmit Bartonella quintana, the causative agent of trench fever. The mechanisms by which body lice became a vector for B. quintana, however, are poorly understood. Following oral challenge, green fluorescent protein-expressing B. quintana proliferated over 9 days postchallenge with the number of bacteria being significantly higher in whole body vs. head lice. The numbers of B. quintana detected in faeces from infected lice, however, were approximately the same in both lice. Nevertheless, the viability of B. quintana was significantly higher in body louse faeces. Comparison of immune responses in alimentary tract tissues revealed that basal transcription levels of peptidoglycan recognition protein and defensins were lower in body lice and the transcription of defensin 1 was up-regulated by oral challenge with wild-type B. quintana in head but not in body lice. In addition, the level of cytotoxic reactive oxygen species generated by epithelial cells was significantly lower in body lice. Although speculative at this time, the reduced immune response is consistent with the higher vector competence seen in body vs. head lice in terms of B. quintana infection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available