Mosquito-fungus interactions and antifungal immunity

Tawidian, Patil; Rhodes, Victoria L.M.; Michel, Kristin

doi:10.1016/j.ibmb.2019.103182

Cited by 46 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 175 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, it has been reported that pathogens present in the blood meal caused an enhanced production of immune effector molecules [55,58]. The interactions between insects and entomopathogenic fungi is complex [31,59]. In mosquitoes, antifungal immune responses are regulated by the Toll, IMD and Jak-STAT pathways [32,40].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Immune Responses with Different Feeding Regimes Following Infection by the Entomopathogenic Fungus Metarhizium anisopliae

Cabral

Junior

Samuels

et al. 2020

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mosquito Aedes aegypti is the most notorious vector of illness-causing viruses. The use of entomopathogenic fungi as bioinsecticides is a promising alternative for the development of novel mosquito control strategies. We investigate whether differences in immune responses could be responsible for modifications in survival rates of insects following different feeding regimes. Sucrose and blood-fed adult A. aegypti females were sprayed with M. anisopliae 1 × 106 conidia mL−1, and after 48 h, the midgut and fat body were dissected. We used RT-qPCR to monitor the expression of Cactus and REL1 (Toll pathway), IMD, REL2, and Caspar (IMD pathway), STAT and PIAS (JAK-STAT pathway), as well as the expression of antimicrobial peptides (Defensin A, Attacin and Cecropin G). REL1 and REL2 expression in both the midgut and fat body were higher in blood-fed fungus-challenged A. aegypti than in sucrose-fed counterparts. Interestingly, infection of sucrose-fed insects induced Cactus expression in the fat body, a negative regulator of the Toll pathway. The IMD gene was upregulated in the fat body in response to fungal infection after a blood meal. Additionally, we observed the induction of antimicrobial peptides in the blood-fed fungus-challenged insects. This study suggests that blood-fed A. aegypti are less susceptible to fungal infection due to the rapid induction of Toll and IMD immune pathways.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Immune Responses with Different Feeding Regimes Following Infection by the Entomopathogenic Fungus Metarhizium anisopliae

Cabral

Junior

Samuels

et al. 2020

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A poorly understood aspect of the ecology of insects involves their interactions with yeasts and how these affect their immunity [52], distribution [53], and vector competence [54]. Yeasts in plant nectar secrete byproducts of fermentation that function as signals for insects to identify food sources.…”

Section: Beyond Plant Odormentioning

confidence: 99%

Not Just from Blood: Mosquito Nutrient Acquisition from Nectar Sources

Barredo

DeGennaro

2020

Trends in Parasitology

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropophilic female mosquitoes are well known for their strong attraction to human hosts, but plant nectar is a common energy source in their diets. When sugar sources are scarce, female mosquitoes of some species can compensate by taking larger and more frequent blood meals. Male mosquitoes are exclusively dependent on plant nectar or alternative sugar sources. Plant preference is likely driven by an innate attraction that may be enhanced by experience, as mosquitoes learn to recognize available sugar rewards. Nectar-seeking involves the integration of at least three sensory systems: olfaction, vision and taste. The prevention of vector-borne illnesses, the determination of the mosquitoes' ecological role, and the design of efficient sugar-baited traps will all benefit from understanding the molecular basis of nectar-seeking. Plant Nectar Is a Common Nutrition Source across Mosquito SpeciesNectar-feeding constitutes an important source of nutrition for adult mosquitoes of both sexes, particularly males, which feed exclusively from plant nectar and require frequent sugar intake for survival [1,2]. This behavior is often underappreciated when compared with blood-feeding because it is during the latter that transmission of pathogens can occur. A few mosquito genera feed solely from plant sources [3], while in hematophagous (see Glossary) species, females consume sugar sources as well as blood. If deprived of sugar, males typically die within 4 days of eclosion [4]. Moreover, lacking the energy reserves needed for flying and copulation that come from a sugar meal, males are unlikely to achieve reproductive success [1]. Although females are less susceptible to rapid mortality caused by sugar deprivation, their survival rate and fecundity can be compromised by reduced energy reserves [1,4]. The sensory cues that enable nectar-feeding include odors [1,2], tastants [5], and visual stimuli [6,7], but the molecular mechanisms of how these cues are perceived, as well as their relative contribution to the detection of a nectar source, are poorly understood (Figure 1). This review highlights the role of sugar feeding in the life cycle of mosquitoes, the plant sources they prefer, the volatiles that attract them, and the contribution of vision, olfaction, and gustation to this behavior.

show abstract

“…Innate immunity is based on the recognition of highly conserved molecular patterns restricted to microbes, e.g., MAMPS (Microbe Associated Molecular Patterns), which are recognized by a set of receptors found on the cell surface of host cells, e.g., PRRs (Pattern Recognition Receptors). The ability of fungal partners to stimulate the mosquito immune system has been studied mainly in entomopathogenic fungi [60]. Detection of fungal surface molecules and secreted secondary metabolites by specific receptors in mosquitoes induces the activation of kinases or transcription factors, which stimulate the production of antimicrobial peptides (defensins, cecropins, diptericins, gambicins) or other effector molecules as well as melanization and phagocytosis of fungal cells (Figure 2).…”

Section: Indirect Impact Through the Modulation Of The Immune Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Detection of fungal surface molecules and secreted secondary metabolites by specific receptors in mosquitoes induces the activation of kinases or transcription factors, which stimulate the production of antimicrobial peptides (defensins, cecropins, diptericins, gambicins) or other effector molecules as well as melanization and phagocytosis of fungal cells (Figure 2). Fungi can stimulate different immune signaling pathways in the midgut and/or fat body such as Toll, Imd (Immune Deficiency), JAK/STAT (Janus Kinase/Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription), JNK/MAPKp38 (Jun N-terminal Kinase/Mitogen Activated Protein Kinase p38), TEP (ThioEster-containing Protein) and immune melanization proteases [60]. The presence of non-entomopathogenic fungi, such as S. cerevisiae and Candida albicans, in the hemolymph of Anopheles albimanus and Culex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes induces the melanization of fungal cells after their recognition by proteins containing thioesters (TEPs).…”

Section: Indirect Impact Through the Modulation Of The Immune Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mosquito Mycobiota: An Overview of Non-Entomopathogenic Fungal Interactions

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing expansion of mosquito vectors leads to the emergence of vector-borne diseases in new geographic areas and causes major public health concerns. In the absence of effective preventive treatments against most pathogens transmitted, vector control remains one of the most suitable strategies to prevent mosquito-borne diseases. Insecticide overuse raises mosquito resistance and deleterious impacts on the environment and non-target species. Growing knowledge of mosquito biology has allowed the development of alternative control methods. Following the concept of holobiont, mosquito-microbiota interactions play an important role in mosquito biology. Associated microbiota is known to influence many aspects of mosquito biology such as development, survival, immunity or even vector competence. Mosquito-associated microbiota is composed of bacteria, fungi, protists, viruses and nematodes. While an increasing number of studies have focused on bacteria, other microbial partners like fungi have been largely neglected despite their huge diversity. A better knowledge of mosquito-mycobiota interactions offers new opportunities to develop innovative mosquito control strategies. Here, we review the recent advances concerning the impact of mosquito-associated fungi, and particularly nonpathogenic fungi, on life-history traits (development, survival, reproduction), vector competence and behavior of mosquitoes by focusing on Culex, Aedes and Anopheles species.

show abstract

Mosquito-fungus interactions and antifungal immunity

Cited by 46 publications

References 175 publications

Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Immune Responses with Different Feeding Regimes Following Infection by the Entomopathogenic Fungus Metarhizium anisopliae

Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Immune Responses with Different Feeding Regimes Following Infection by the Entomopathogenic Fungus Metarhizium anisopliae

Not Just from Blood: Mosquito Nutrient Acquisition from Nectar Sources

Mosquito Mycobiota: An Overview of Non-Entomopathogenic Fungal Interactions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About