Mosquito immune responses to arbovirus infections

Blair, Carol D.; Olson, Ken E.

doi:10.1016/j.cois.2014.07.005

Cited by 38 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 98 publications

(85 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From an experimental perspective, scientists have taken advantage of the insect's own RNAi machinery to study the function of insect genes, and it has been proposed that RNAi could be used for the management of insect pests (Scott et al, 2013; Yu et al, 2013). Nevertheless, one of the natural functions of RNAi is to protect the organism from viral infection (Blair and Olson, 2014; Bronkhorst and van Rij, 2014; Karlikow et al, 2014; Sim et al, 2014). …”

Section: Immune Effector Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Insect immunology and hematopoiesis

Hillyer

2016

Developmental & Comparative Immunology

414

345

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insects combat infection by mounting powerful immune responses that are mediated by hemocytes, the fat body, the midgut, the salivary glands and other tissues. Foreign organisms that have entered the body of an insect are recognized by the immune system when pathogen-associated molecular patterns bind host-derived pattern recognition receptors. This, in turn, activates immune signaling pathways that amplify the immune response, induce the production of factors with antimicrobial activity, and activate effector pathways. Among the immune signaling pathways are the Toll, Imd, Jak/Stat, JNK, and insulin pathways. Activation of these and other pathways leads to pathogen killing via phagocytosis, melanization, cellular encapsulation, nodulation, lysis, RNAi-mediated virus destruction, autophagy and apoptosis. This review details these and other aspects of immunity in insects, and discusses how the immune and circulatory systems have co-adapted to combat infection, how hemocyte replication and differentiation takes place (hematopoiesis), how an infection prepares an insect for a subsequent infection (immune priming), how environmental factors such as temperature and the age of the insect impact the immune response, and how social immunity protects entire groups. Finally, this review highlights some underexplored areas in the field of insect immunobiology.

show abstract

Section: Immune Effector Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to the siRNA pathway, the PIWI-associated RNA pathway (piRNA) also functions in the RNAi-mediated antiviral defense of mosquitoes (Blair and Olson, 2014; Bronkhorst and van Rij, 2014). piRNAs are 25-30 nucleotides in length and associate with the PIWI clade of Argonaute proteins.…”

Section: Immune Effector Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insect immunology and hematopoiesis

Hillyer

2016

Developmental & Comparative Immunology

414

345

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each has a distinct role in antiviral defense, regulation of development and host gene expression, or defense of the host genome against transposon mobilization and expression, respectively. The three pathways of RNAi have been discussed in some length in previous reviews [8,9]. In this review, we will concentrate on recent advances in understanding Dm and mosquito siRNA and piRNA pathway interactions with viruses.…”

Section: Rnai Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The EIP can take 5-14 days for DENVs and WNV depending on virus and mosquito genotypes and environmental conditions [3-6]. Mosquitoes are not passive during EIP and the persistent phase of infection and mount a number of innate antiviral responses that modulate arbovirus infections (reviewed in [7-9]). The RNAi pathway is the major innate antiviral response vectors have to restrict arbovirus infections [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arbovirus–mosquito interactions: RNAi pathway

Olson

Blair

2015

Current Opinion in Virology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arthropod-borne (arbo) viruses infect hematophagous arthropods (vectors) to maintain virus transmission between vertebrate hosts. The mosquito vector actively controls arbovirus infection to minimize its fitness costs. The RNA interference (RNAi) pathway is the major antiviral response vectors use to restrict arbovirus infections. We know this because depleting RNAi gene products profoundly impacts arbovirus replication, the antiviral RNAi pathway genes undergo positive, diversifying selection and arboviruses have evolved strategies to evade the vector's RNAi responses. The vector's RNAi defense and arbovirus countermeasures lead to an arms race that prevents potential virus-induced fitness costs yet maintains arbovirus infections needed for transmission. This review will discuss the latest findings in RNAi-arbovirus interactions in the model insect (Drosophila melanogaster) and in specific mosquito vectors.

show abstract

“…Vector-borne pathogens do, however, exploit the vector to develop or to replicate (Hardy et al 1983). Vectors are not passive carriers of pathogens, and insect vectors have multiple immune defenses against infection (Murdock et al 2013, Blair andOlson 2014). It is now established that arboviruses can increase mortality, reduce fecundity, and alter the feeding behavior of females (reviewed by Lambrechts and Scott 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How do Nutritional Stress and La Crosse Virus Infection Interact? Tests for Effects on Willingness to Blood Feed and Fecundity inAedes albopictus(Diptera: Culicidae)

Westby

Muturi²,

Juliano³

2015

J Med Entomol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolutionary theory predicts that vector-borne pathogens should have low virulence for their vector because of selection against pathogens that harm the vector sufficiently to reduce transmission. Environmental factors such as nutritional stress can alter vector-pathogen associations by making the vectors more susceptible to pathogens (condition-dependent competence) and vulnerable to the harm caused by pathogen replication (condition-dependent virulence). We tested the hypotheses of condition-dependent competence and conditiondependent virulence by examining the interactive effects of short-term sugar deprivation and exposure to La Crosse virus (LACV) in female Aedes albopictus (Skuse). We predicted that infection status interacts with sugar deprivation to alter willingness to blood feed and fecundity in the second gonotrophic cycle (conditiondependent virulence). Sugar deprivation had no effect on body infection or disseminated infection rates. Infection status, sugar treatment, and their interaction had no effect on fecundity. Mosquitoes that had intermittent access to sugar were significantly more willing to take a second bloodmeal compared with those that had continuous access to sugar. Infection status and the interaction with sugar treatment had no effect on bloodfeeding behavior. Thus, we found no evidence of short-term sugar deprivation leading to condition-dependent competence for, or condition-dependent virulence of, LACV in Ae. albopictus.

show abstract

Mosquito immune responses to arbovirus infections

Cited by 38 publications

References 98 publications

Insect immunology and hematopoiesis

Insect immunology and hematopoiesis

Arbovirus–mosquito interactions: RNAi pathway

How do Nutritional Stress and La Crosse Virus Infection Interact? Tests for Effects on Willingness to Blood Feed and Fecundity inAedes albopictus(Diptera: Culicidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About