Pathogenicity and protective effect of rough mutants of Salmonella species in germ-free piglets
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
9393821
PubMed Central
PMC175754
DOI
10.1128/iai.65.12.5238-5243.1997
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- gnotobiologické modely * MeSH
- miniaturní prasata MeSH
- mutace * MeSH
- prasata MeSH
- Salmonella genetika patogenita MeSH
- salmonelová infekce u zvířat mikrobiologie MeSH
- virulence genetika MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Check Tag
- zvířata MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
In this study, two stable, rough, streptomycin-sensitive Salmonella mutants with different types of genetic defects were used to colonize groups of germ-free (GF) piglets. The lipopolysaccharide (LPS) of Salmonella typhimurium SF 1591 was of the Ra chemotype (complete core), whereas the LPS of the S. minnesota mR 595 deep-rough mutant contained only lipid A and 2-keto-3-deoxyoctulosonic acid (Re chemotype). Both strains readily colonized the intestinal tracts of GF piglets and were stable during the whole experiment. All animals survived, and only transient fever was observed in some piglets colonized with the SF 1591 strain. Finally, streptomycin and virulent, smooth, streptomycin-resistant S. typhimurium LT2 were administered perorally 1 week later. All piglets colonized previously with the deep-rough mutant mR 595 died of sepsis, in contrast to piglets infected with the LT2 strain and colonized with the SF 1591 mutant, all of which survived. This difference is explained by the penetration of the mesenteric lymph nodes, spleen, and liver by great numbers of live bacteria in the latter case, resulting in prominent systemic and local immune responses. On the other hand, live bacteria were found only rarely in the mesenteric lymph nodes of animals colonized with the mR 595 strain and a negligible antibody response was observed.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Am J Med. 1984 Apr;76(4):664-71 PubMed
J Hyg (Lond). 1972 Jun;70(2):335-42 PubMed
J Exp Med. 1966 Oct 1;124(4):573-83 PubMed
Lab Invest. 1963 Mar;12:355-64 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1972 May;5(5):792-7 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1995 Oct;63(10):3904-13 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1979 Feb;23(2):403-11 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1970 Sep;2(3):309-15 PubMed
Eur J Biochem. 1969 Jun;9(2):245-9 PubMed
Microbiol Immunol. 1989;33(9):699-708 PubMed
J Bacteriol. 1968 Feb;95(2):406-17 PubMed
Microbiol Rev. 1989 Jun;53(2):210-30 PubMed
J Immunol. 1984 Aug;133(2):950-7 PubMed
Infect Agents Dis. 1993 Apr;2(2):55-73 PubMed
Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 1994 Oct;43(1-3):135-42 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1972 Oct;6(4):451-8 PubMed
N Engl J Med. 1972 Aug 10;287(6):261-7 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1992 May;60(5):1786-92 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1989 Aug;86(16):6383-7 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1996 Sep;64(9):3811-7 PubMed
Res Microbiol. 1994 Sep;145(7):543-52 PubMed
J Exp Med. 1994 Jul 1;180(1):15-23 PubMed
Immunology. 1996 Aug;88(4):611-7 PubMed
J Bacteriol. 1969 Feb;97(2):667-75 PubMed
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1983 Jun 30;409:96-113 PubMed
Science. 1991 May 17;252(5008):934-8 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1992 May;60(5):1820-5 PubMed
Eur J Biochem. 1980;107(1):137-43 PubMed
Zentralbl Bakteriol Orig A. 1971 Jun;217(2):183-97 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1984 Sep;45(3):631-6 PubMed
Microbiol Rev. 1985 Sep;49(3):298-337 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1985 Dec;50(3):716-20 PubMed
Adv Exp Med Biol. 1995;371A:473-7 PubMed
Cell. 1991 Jun 28;65(7):1099-102 PubMed
Infect Immun. 1997 Dec;65(12):5244-9 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 1984 Sep;150(3):425-35 PubMed
J Infect Dis. 1988 Jan;157(1):78-84 PubMed
Innate immune response in the gut against Salmonella - review
Cytokines in Salmonella infection
Salmonellosis: lessons drawn from a germ-free pig model