BackgroundParasites can either respond to differences in immune defenses that exist between individual hosts plastically or, alternatively, follow a genetically canalized (“hard wired”) program of infection. Assuming that large-scale functional plasticity would be discernible in the parasite transcriptome we have performed a dual RNA-seq study of the lifecycle of Eimeria falciformis using infected mice with different immune status as models for coccidian infections.ResultsWe compared parasite and host transcriptomes (dual transcriptome) between naïve and challenge infected mice, as well as between immune competent and immune deficient ones. Mice with different immune competence show transcriptional differences as well as differences in parasite reproduction (oocyst shedding). Broad gene categories represented by differently abundant host genes indicate enrichments for immune reaction and tissue repair functions. More specifically, TGF-beta, EGF, TNF and IL-1 and IL-6 are examples of functional annotations represented differently depending on host immune status. Much in contrast, parasite transcriptomes were neither different between Coccidia isolated from immune competent and immune deficient mice, nor between those harvested from naïve and challenge infected mice. Instead, parasite transcriptomes have distinct profiles early and late in infection, characterized largely by biosynthesis or motility associated functional gene groups, respectively. Extracellular sporozoite and oocyst stages showed distinct transcriptional profiles and sporozoite transcriptomes were found enriched for species specific genes and likely pathogenicity factors.ConclusionWe propose that the niche and host-specific parasite E. falciformis uses a genetically canalized program of infection. This program is likely fixed in an evolutionary process rather than employing phenotypic plasticity to interact with its host. This in turn might limit the potential of the parasite to adapt to new host species or niches, forcing it to coevolve with its host.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12864-017-4095-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rodents, in particular Mus musculus, have a long and invaluable history as models for human diseases in biomedical research, although their translational value has been challenged in a number of cases. We provide some examples in which rodents have been suboptimal as models for human biology and discuss confounders which influence experiments and may explain some of the misleading results. Infections of rodents with protozoan parasites are no exception in requiring close consideration upon model choice. We focus on the significant differences between inbred, outbred and wild animals, and the importance of factors such as microbiota, which are gaining attention as crucial variables in infection experiments. Frequently, mouse or rat models are chosen for convenience, e.g., availability in the institution rather than on an unbiased evaluation of whether they provide the answer to a given question. Apart from a general discussion on translational success or failure, we provide examples where infections with single-celled parasites in a chosen lab rodent gave contradictory or misleading results, and when possible discuss the reason for this. We present emerging alternatives to traditional rodent models, such as humanized mice and organoid primary cell cultures. So-called recombinant inbred strains such as the Collaborative Cross collection are also a potential solution for certain challenges. In addition, we emphasize the advantages of using wild rodents for certain immunological, ecological, and/or behavioral questions. The experimental challenges (e.g., availability of species-specific reagents) that come with the use of such non-model systems are also discussed. Our intention is to foster critical judgment of both traditional and newly available translational rodent models for research on parasitic protozoa that can complement the existing mouse and rat models.

Background: Parasites can either respond to differences in immune defenses that exist