| Literature DB >> 28035261 |
Rebecca L Watson1, Tom N McNeilly2, Kathryn A Watt1, Josephine M Pemberton1, Jill G Pilkington1, Martin Waterfall1, Phoebe R T Hopper1, Daniel Cooney1, Rose Zamoyska1, Daniel H Nussey1.
Abstract
Immune defenses are expected to be crucial for survival under the considerable parasite pressures experienced by wild animals. However, our understanding of the association between immunity and fitness in nature remains limited due to both the complexity of the vertebrate immune system and the often-limited availability of immune reagents in nonmodel organisms. Here, we use methods and reagents developed by veterinary researchers for domestic ungulates on blood samples collected from a wild Soay sheep population, to evaluate an unusually broad panel of immune parameters. Our evaluation included different innate and acquired immune cell types as well as nematode parasite-specific antibodies of different isotypes. We test how these markers correlate with one another, how they vary with age-group and sex, and, crucially, whether they predict overwinter survival either within or among demographic groups. We found anticipated patterns of variation in markers with age, associated with immune development, and once these age trends were accounted for, correlations among our 11 immune markers were generally weak. We found that females had higher proportions of naïve T cells and gamma-delta T cells than males, independent of age, while our other markers did not differ between sexes. Only one of our 11 markers predicted overwinter survival: sheep with higher plasma levels of anti-nematode IgG antibodies were significantly more likely to survive the subsequent high mortality winter, independent of age, sex, or weight. This supports a previous finding from this study system using a different set of samples and shows that circulating antibody levels against ecologically relevant parasites in natural systems represent an important parameter of immune function and may be under strong natural selection. Our data provide rare insights into patterns of variation among age- and sex groups in different T-cell subsets and antibody levels in the wild, and suggest that certain types of immune response-notably those likely to be repeatable within individuals and linked to resistance to ecologically relevant parasites-may be most informative for research into the links between immunity and fitness under natural conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Ovis aries; St Kilda; T cell; Teladorsagia circumcincta; antibody; ecological immunology; fitness; gastrointestinal nematode; lymphocyte
Year: 2016 PMID: 28035261 PMCID: PMC5192870 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2584
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Results of linear models testing age and sex effects on each of the 11 immune parameters measured in this study. Global F tests of the significance of the age‐by‐sex interaction, and the age‐group and sex main effects are reported. Interactions between sex and age‐group were tested but were not significant in any case, so main effects of sex and age‐group are reported with the interaction dropped from the model. Estimated differences in the mean among age‐ and sex groups are reported along with standard errors of differences in brackets, expressed as difference from the female lamb group. The R‐squared value refers to the model with age and sex included as main effects only
| Immune marker | Global tests | Post hoc comparisons |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age x Sex | Age | Sex | Intercept (female lambs) | vs. males | vs. yearlings | vs. adults | vs. geriatrics | ||
| Neutrophil: Lymphocyte | 2.213 | 8.343*** | 1.159 | 0.798 (0.126) | 0.147 (0.137) | 0.140 (0.228) | 0.613 (0.144) | 0.819 (0.217) | .087 |
| Eosinophil | 0.461 | 17.346*** | 1.324 | 2.085 (0.560) | −0.699 (0.608) | 2.392 (1.015) | 4.512 (0.642) | 4.111 (0.968) | .201 |
| CD4+ | 0.854 | 7.424*** | 0.088 | 25.185 (1.464) | −0.489 (1.647) | 6.539 (2.563) | 4.287 (1.671) | 11.510 (2.535) | .097 |
| CD8+ | 0.117 | 7.806*** | 0.217 | 5.617 (0.464) | −0.246 (0.528) | −0.918 (0.811) | 1.593 (0.535) | 2.987 (0.882) | .103 |
| CD4+ Naive | 0.440 | 72.022*** | 10.707** | 47.392 (1.606) | −5.936 (1.814) | −20.426 (2.808) | −25.229 (1.847) | −30.845 (2.988) | .544 |
| CD8+ Naive | 0.525 | 32.524*** | 4.462* | 73.020 (2.296) | −5.480 (2.594) | −10.953 (4.016) | −23.673 (2.641) | −35.205 (4.274) | .373 |
|
| 0.401 | 112.87*** | 12.42*** | 26.796 (0.856) | −3.353 (0.951) | −7.928 (1.450) | −16.404 (0.970) | −19.180 (1.435) | .655 |
| Treg | 0.742 | 1.221 | 0.004 | 4.0504 (0.588) | −0.042 (0.662) | −1.410 (1.013) | −1.170 (0.672) | −0.532 (1.035) | −.002 |
| Anti‐Tc IgA | 0.763 | 28.970*** | 0.508 | 0.168 (0.031) | −0.024 (0.034) | 0.215 (0.060) | 0.286 (0.035) | 0.404 (0.054) | .248 |
| Anti‐Tc IgE | 2.311 | 44.195*** | 0.178 | 0.041 (0.012) | −0.006 (0.013) | 0.085 (0.024) | 0.127 (0.014) | 0.221 (0022) | .332 |
| Anti‐Tc IgG | 0.664 | 82.609*** | 0.010 | 0.325 (0.032) | −0.003 (0.035) | 0.625 (0.062) | 0.537 (0.036) | 0.452 (0.056) | .480 |
Figure 1Correlation matrices showing pairwise Pearson's correlation coefficients among all 11 immune parameters. (a): Raw data and (b): correlations among residuals from a model of the immune parameter including age‐group as a factor. The strength of each pairwise correlation coefficient is represented in the strength of the color, which is blue for positive correlations and red for negative correlations. For ease of visualization, the numbers in the boxes have been *100. Abbreviations refer to neutrophil: lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and gamma–delta T cells (GD)
Figure 2Variation in immune parameters among age‐groups. The mean for each age‐group is represented by a diamond shape within each box and the median by a black horizontal line. The box represents the interquartile range (IQR) and the whiskers show the highest and lowest values within 1.5*IQR. Measures included are as follows: eosinophil count (“Eosinophil”), neutrophil: lymphocyte ratio (NLR), proportion of lymphocytes which are “CD4+” and “CD8+”, and the proportion of these subsets which are, in turn, CD45RA+ (“Naïve”) or FoxP3+ (“Treg”), the proportion of “gamma–delta+” T cells, and the optical density scores for antibodies against Teladorsagia circumcincta (“Anti‐Tc”) of isotypes IgG, IgA, and IgE
Figure 3Sex differences observed in three of the 11 immune parameters: naïve T cytotoxic (CD8+), naïve T helper (CD4+), and gamma–delta T cells. In all three parameters shown, females have higher proportions of each cell type than males, and this difference was found to be independent of age (see Table 3). The mean for each age‐group is represented by a diamond shape within each box and the median by a black horizontal line. The box represents the interquartile range (IQR) and the whiskers show the highest and lowest values within 1.5*IQR
Generalized linear models of overwinter survival including an age‐by‐sex interaction and August weight (see Results section for details) with each immune parameter separated included and tested. A sex‐by‐immune parameter interaction was tested and dropped where nonsignificant, and the slope (with standard error in brackets) and likelihood ratio test statistic is reported for each immune parameter fitted separately
| Immune marker | Sex*Immune marker | Immune marker | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| b ( | χ2 | |
| Neutrophil: Lymphocyte | 0.244 | −0.291 (0.172) | 2.854 |
| Eosinophil | 0.319 | −0.036 (0.037) | 0.956 |
| CD4+ | 1.775 | −0.013 (0.018) | 0.565 |
| CD8+ | 0.927 | −0.007 (0.055) | 0.017 |
| CD4+ naïve | 0.690 | 0.015 (0.017) | 0.848 |
| CD8+ naïve | 3.603 | 0.018 (0.012) | 2.288 |
|
| 0.303 | 0.052 (0.035) | 2.275 |
| Treg | 0.172 | 0.030 (0.044) | 0.488 |
| Anti‐Tc IgA | 0.494 | 0.648 (0.550) | 1.428 |
| Anti‐Tc IgE | 0.002 | 0.723 (1.354) | 0.287 |
| Anti‐Tc IgG | 1.844 | 2.179 (0.577) | 15.505*** |
Figure 4A logistic regression plot of the relationship between August anti‐Teladorsagia circumcincta IgG antibody levels and subsequent overwinter survival (1 = survived, 0 = died). The points in the plots are the raw data and include all age‐groups and sexes combined. The black line is of the predicted values for adult females from the final model. The dotted lines show the standard error of these values