4.6 Article

Exploring the immune signalling pathway-related genes of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus: From molecular characterization to transcriptional profile upon microbial challenge

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dci.2015.12.018

关键词

Innate immunity; Tick; Signalling pathway; Rhipicephalus microplus; Anaplasma marginale

资金

  1. CAPES
  2. CNPq
  3. FAPESP [2011/23549-2, 2013/25213-7, 2010/50940-1, 2011/22124-8, 2013/24673-4, 2013/26450-2]
  4. INCT-EM
  5. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [11/22124-8] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In dipteran insects, invading pathogens are selectively recognized by four major pathways, namely Toll, IMD, JNK, and JAK/STAT, and trigger the activation of several immune effectors. Although substantial advances have been made in understanding the immunity of model insects such as Drosophila melanogaster, knowledge on the activation of immune responses in other arthropods such as ticks remains limited. Herein, we have deepened our understanding of the intracellular signalling pathways likely to be involved in tick immunity by combining a large-scale in silico approach with high-throughput gene expression analysis. Data from in si/ico analysis revealed that although both the Toll and JAK/STAT signalling pathways are evolutionarily conserved across arthropods, ticks lack central components of the D. melanogaster IMD pathway. Moreover, we show that tick immune signalling-associated genes are constitutively transcribed in BME26 cells (a cell lineage derived from embryos of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus) and exhibit different transcriptional patterns in response to microbial challenge. Interestingly, Anaplasma marginale, a pathogen that is naturally transmitted by R. microplus, causes downregulation of immune-related genes, suggesting that this pathogen may manipulate the tick immune system, favouring its survival and vector colonization. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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