Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi

Mosquitoes that transmit many deadly infectious diseases also need to keep fighting against many microbial infections. Constitutive expression of multiple antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in almost all body tissues is believed to facilitate the effective management of these local infections. When any i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Tanwee Das De, Punita Sharma, Tina Thomas, Deepak Singla, Sanjay Tevatiya, Seena Kumari, Charu Chauhan, Jyoti Rani, Vartika Srivastava, Ramandeep Kaur, Kailash C. Pandey, Rajnikant Dixit
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-02-01
Series:Frontiers in Immunology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2018.00148/full
id doaj-fd2dba76f049401e898a13724256fa28
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fd2dba76f049401e898a13724256fa282020-11-25T00:21:48ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Immunology1664-32242018-02-01910.3389/fimmu.2018.00148320655Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensiTanwee Das De0Tanwee Das De1Punita Sharma2Tina Thomas3Deepak Singla4Sanjay Tevatiya5Seena Kumari6Charu Chauhan7Jyoti Rani8Vartika Srivastava9Ramandeep Kaur10Kailash C. Pandey11Rajnikant Dixit12Host-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaDepartment of Biotechnology, Delhi Technological University, Shahbad Daulatpur, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaDepartment of Biochemistry, National Institute for Research in Environmental Health, Indian Council of Medical Research, Bhopal, IndiaHost-Parasite Interaction Biology Group, ICMR-National Institute of Malaria Research, New Delhi, IndiaMosquitoes that transmit many deadly infectious diseases also need to keep fighting against many microbial infections. Constitutive expression of multiple antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in almost all body tissues is believed to facilitate the effective management of these local infections. When any infection breaches the local barrier, AMPs are induced rapidly in non-target tissues such as hemocytes (HCs) and establish their co-ordination with systemic immune effectors to clear off the body infection. But how interorgan immune communication is managed during local and systemic infections remain largely unknown. To understand this interorgan molecular relationship, we identified, extensively profiled and compared the expression of AMPs in three important mosquito tissues viz. midgut, fat body (FB), and HCs. dsRNA-mediated AMPs silencing suggests that mosquito tissues are able to manage an optimal expression of AMPs at the physiological level. We also examined the possible contribution of two important immune regulator genes relish (REL) and nitric oxide synthase, controlling AMPs expression in these tissues during local or systemic infections. We show that each tissue has a unique ability to respond to local/systemic challenges, but HCs are more specialized to recognize and discriminate-specific antigens than gut and FB. Our investigation also revealed that both REL and NO participate in the overall management of the interorgan immune responses, but at the same time each tissue also has its own ability to maintain the interorgan flow of signals. In our knowledge, this is the first large-scale study examining the interorgan immune relationship in the mosquito.http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2018.00148/fullmosquitoinnate immunityantimicrobial peptidefat bodymidguthemocyte
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Tanwee Das De
Tanwee Das De
Punita Sharma
Tina Thomas
Deepak Singla
Sanjay Tevatiya
Seena Kumari
Charu Chauhan
Jyoti Rani
Vartika Srivastava
Ramandeep Kaur
Kailash C. Pandey
Rajnikant Dixit
spellingShingle Tanwee Das De
Tanwee Das De
Punita Sharma
Tina Thomas
Deepak Singla
Sanjay Tevatiya
Seena Kumari
Charu Chauhan
Jyoti Rani
Vartika Srivastava
Ramandeep Kaur
Kailash C. Pandey
Rajnikant Dixit
Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi
Frontiers in Immunology
mosquito
innate immunity
antimicrobial peptide
fat body
midgut
hemocyte
author_facet Tanwee Das De
Tanwee Das De
Punita Sharma
Tina Thomas
Deepak Singla
Sanjay Tevatiya
Seena Kumari
Charu Chauhan
Jyoti Rani
Vartika Srivastava
Ramandeep Kaur
Kailash C. Pandey
Rajnikant Dixit
author_sort Tanwee Das De
title Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi
title_short Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi
title_full Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi
title_fullStr Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi
title_full_unstemmed Interorgan Molecular Communication Strategies of “Local” and “Systemic” Innate Immune Responses in Mosquito Anopheles stephensi
title_sort interorgan molecular communication strategies of “local” and “systemic” innate immune responses in mosquito anopheles stephensi
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Immunology
issn 1664-3224
publishDate 2018-02-01
description Mosquitoes that transmit many deadly infectious diseases also need to keep fighting against many microbial infections. Constitutive expression of multiple antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in almost all body tissues is believed to facilitate the effective management of these local infections. When any infection breaches the local barrier, AMPs are induced rapidly in non-target tissues such as hemocytes (HCs) and establish their co-ordination with systemic immune effectors to clear off the body infection. But how interorgan immune communication is managed during local and systemic infections remain largely unknown. To understand this interorgan molecular relationship, we identified, extensively profiled and compared the expression of AMPs in three important mosquito tissues viz. midgut, fat body (FB), and HCs. dsRNA-mediated AMPs silencing suggests that mosquito tissues are able to manage an optimal expression of AMPs at the physiological level. We also examined the possible contribution of two important immune regulator genes relish (REL) and nitric oxide synthase, controlling AMPs expression in these tissues during local or systemic infections. We show that each tissue has a unique ability to respond to local/systemic challenges, but HCs are more specialized to recognize and discriminate-specific antigens than gut and FB. Our investigation also revealed that both REL and NO participate in the overall management of the interorgan immune responses, but at the same time each tissue also has its own ability to maintain the interorgan flow of signals. In our knowledge, this is the first large-scale study examining the interorgan immune relationship in the mosquito.
topic mosquito
innate immunity
antimicrobial peptide
fat body
midgut
hemocyte
url http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2018.00148/full
work_keys_str_mv AT tanweedasde interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT tanweedasde interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT punitasharma interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT tinathomas interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT deepaksingla interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT sanjaytevatiya interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT seenakumari interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT charuchauhan interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT jyotirani interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT vartikasrivastava interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT ramandeepkaur interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT kailashcpandey interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
AT rajnikantdixit interorganmolecularcommunicationstrategiesoflocalandsystemicinnateimmuneresponsesinmosquitoanophelesstephensi
_version_ 1725360952069586944