Effects of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, or serovar Choleraesuis, Lactobacillus reuteri and Bacillus licheniformis on chemokine and cytokine expression in the swine jejunal epithelial cell line, IPEC-J2

Skjolaas, K.A.; Burkey, Thomas E.; Dritz, S. S.; Minton, J. Ernest

doi:10.1016/j.vetimm.2006.10.012

Cited by 48 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among those cytokines, production of IL8 is crucial in diarrhea development and infection clearance (Zilbauer et al, 2008). However, commensal bacteria are not able to stimulate this proinflammatory response (Skjolaas et al, 2007). Previous studies have shown the ability of Campylobacter species to elicit IL8 production by human epithelial cells (MacCallum et al, 2006;Zheng et al, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction between Campylobacter and intestinal epithelial cells leads to a different proinflammatory response in human and porcine host

Aguilar¹,

Jiménez-Marín²,

Martins³

et al. 2014

Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interaction between Campylobacter and intestinal epithelial cells leads to a different proinflammatory response in human and porcine host

Aguilar¹,

Jiménez-Marín²,

Martins³

et al. 2014

Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…reuteri ATCC 53608 and Bacillus licheniformis ATCC 10716, that were able to significantly inhibit Salmonella-stimulated IL-8 basolateral secretion (Skjolaas et al 2007). …”

Section: Probiotics Used In Pig Intestinal Cells Challenged With Entementioning

confidence: 99%

Immunomodulating effects of probiotics for microbiota modulation, gut health and disease resistance in pigs

Roselli

Pieper

Rogel–Gaillard

et al. 2017

Animal Feed Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms HIGHLIGHTS-Updated literature overview about probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics on pig gut health is provided -Both in vivo studies performed in pigs and in vitro studies conducted in pig intestinal cell lines are described -A critical outcome of the described results is provided -The concept of "proxy measurements" for pig gut health is widely discussed -The link between gut microbiota and mucsal immune system is described Abstract:Probiotics are live microorganisms that can confer a health benefit on the host, and amongst various mechanisms probiotics are believed to exert their effects by production of antimicrobial substances, competition with pathogens for adhesion sites and nutrients, enhancement of mucosal barrier integrity and immune modulation. Through these activities probiotics can support three core benefits for the host: supporting a healthy gut microbiota, a healthy digestive tract and a healthy immune system. More recently, the concept of combining probiotics and prebiotics, i.e. synbiotics, for the beneficial effect on gut health of pigs has attracted major interest, and examples of probiotic and prebiotic benefits for pigs are pathogen inhibition and immunomodulation. Yet, it remains to be defined in pigs, what exactly is a healthy gut. Because of the high level of variability in growth and feed conversion between individual pigs in commercial production systems, measuring the impact of probiotics on gut health defined by improvements in overall productivity requires large experiments. For this reason, many studies have concentrated on measuring the effects of the feed additives on proxies of gut health including many immunological measures, in more controlled experiments. With the major focus of studying the balance between gut microbiology, immunology and physiology, and the potential for prevention of intestinal disorders in pigs, we therefore performed a literature review of the immunomodulatory effects of probiotics, either alone or in combination with prebiotics, based on in vivo, in vitro and ex vivo porcine experiments. A 3 consistent number of studies showed the potential capacity in terms of immunomodulatory activities of these feed additives in pigs, but contrasting results can also be obtained from the literature.Reasons for this are not clear but could be related to differences with respect to the probiotic strain used, experimental settings, diets, initial microbiota colonization, administration route, time and frequency of administration of the probiotic strain and sampling for analysis. Hence, the use of proxy measurements of enteric health based on observable immunological parameters presents significant problems at the moment, and cannot be considered robust, reliable predictors of the probiotic activity in vivo, in relation to pig gut health. In c...

show abstract

“…In that study and in the present one, it is possible that differences in earlier transcriptional responses to the strains that may influence the outcome of infection were missed. Studies using the porcine jejunal epithelial cell line IPEC-J2 have indicated that a strain of serovar Typhimurium elicits significantly higher levels of IL-8 protein and mRNA than serovar Choleraesuis at 3 and 6 h after invasion (39,40). Conflicting data exist on the induction of IL-8 mRNA at just 1.5 h after invasion of IPEC-J2 cells, with one study detecting no difference between the serovars (39) and another reporting significantly elevated levels of IL-8 in response to serovar Typhimurium (40).…”

Section: Vol 75 2007 Net Replication Of S Enterica Serovars In Pigmentioning

confidence: 99%

Net Replication ofSalmonella entericaSerovars Typhimurium and Choleraesuis in Porcine Intestinal Mucosa and Nodes Is Associated with Their Differential Virulence

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Salmonella enterica is a facultative intracellular pathogen of worldwide importance and causes a spectrum of diseases depending on serovar-and host-specific factors. Oral infection of pigs with S. enterica serovar Typhimurium strain 4/74 produces acute enteritis but is rarely fatal, whereas serovar Choleraesuis strain A50 causes systemic disease with a high mortality rate. With a porcine ligated ileal loop model, we observed that systemic virulence of serovar Choleraesuis A50 is not associated with enhanced intestinal invasion, secretory responses, or neutrophil recruitment compared to serovar Typhimurium 4/74. The net growth in vivo of serovar Choleraesuis A50 and serovar Typhimurium 4/74 was monitored following oral inoculation of pigs with strains harboring pHSG422, which exhibits temperature-sensitive replication. Analysis of plasmid partitioning revealed that the enteric virulence of serovar Typhimurium 4/74 relative to that of serovar Choleraesuis A50 is associated with rapid replication in the intestinal wall, whereas systemic virulence of serovar Choleraesuis A50 is associated with enhanced persistence in intestinal mesenteric lymph nodes. Faster replication of serovar Typhimurium, compared to that of serovar Choleraesuis, in the intestinal mucosa was associated with greater induction of the proinflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-8 (IL-8), and IL-18 as detected by reverse transcriptase PCR analysis of transcripts from infected mucosa. During replication in batch culture and porcine alveolar macrophages, transcription of genes encoding components of type III secretion systems 1 (sipC) and 2 (sseC) was observed to be significantly higher in serovar Typhimurium 4/74 than in serovar Choleraesuis A50, and this may contribute to the differences in epithelial invasion and intracellular proliferation. The rapid induction of proinflammatory responses by strain 4/74 may explain why pigs confine serovar Typhimurium infection to the intestines, whereas slow replication of serovar Choleraesuis may enable it to evade host innate immunity and thus disseminate by stealth.

show abstract

Effects of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, or serovar Choleraesuis, Lactobacillus reuteri and Bacillus licheniformis on chemokine and cytokine expression in the swine jejunal epithelial cell line, IPEC-J2

Cited by 48 publications

References 31 publications

Interaction between Campylobacter and intestinal epithelial cells leads to a different proinflammatory response in human and porcine host

Interaction between Campylobacter and intestinal epithelial cells leads to a different proinflammatory response in human and porcine host

Immunomodulating effects of probiotics for microbiota modulation, gut health and disease resistance in pigs

Net Replication ofSalmonella entericaSerovars Typhimurium and Choleraesuis in Porcine Intestinal Mucosa and Nodes Is Associated with Their Differential Virulence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About