4.6 Article

Monitoring Gene Expression during a Galleria mellonella Bacterial Infection

期刊

MICROORGANISMS
卷 8, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8111798

关键词

Galleria mellonella; P; aeruginosa; hemolymph; hemocytes; bioluminescence; promoter probe vector; optimized RNA extraction; ribonucleotide reductases

资金

  1. Ministerio de Economia, Industria y Competitividad
  2. MINECO
  3. Agencia Estatal de Investigacion (AEI), Spain
  4. Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional, FEDER, European Union [RTI2018-098573-B-100]
  5. CERCA program [2017SGR-1079]
  6. AGAUR-Generalitat de Catalunya [2017SGR-1079]
  7. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER)
  8. Catalan Cystic Fibrosis association
  9. Obra Social La Caixa
  10. Generalitat de Catalunya through the FI program [2017 FI_B2 00830]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Galleria mellonella larvae are an alternative in vivo model that has been extensively used to study the virulence and pathogenicity of different bacteria due to its practicality and lack of ethical constraints. However, the larvae possess intrinsic autofluorescence that obstructs the use of fluorescent proteins to study bacterial infections, hence better methodologies are needed. Here, we report the construction of a promoter probe vector with bioluminescence expression as well as the optimization of a total bacterial RNA extraction protocol to enhance the monitoring of in vivo infections. By employing the vector to construct different gene promoter fusions, variable gene expression levels were efficiently measured in G. mellonella larvae at various time points during the course of infection and without much manipulation of the larvae. Additionally, our optimized RNA extraction protocol facilitates the study of transcriptional gene levels during an in vivo infection. The proposed methodologies will greatly benefit bacterial infection studies as they can contribute to a better understanding of the in vivo infection processes and pathogen-mammalian host interactions.

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