| Literature DB >> 28208612 |
Wageha A Awad1,2, Claudia Hess3, Michael Hess4.
Abstract
Maintaining a healthy gut environment is a prerequisite for sustainable animal production. The gut plays a key role in the digestion and absorption of nutrients and constitutes an initial organ exposed to external factors influencing bird's health. The intestinal epithelial barrier serves as the first line of defense between the host and the luminal environment. It consists of a continuous monolayer of intestinal epithelial cells connected by intercellular junctional complexes which shrink the space between adjacent cells. Consequently, free passing of solutes and water via the paracellular pathway is prevented. Tight junctions (TJs) are multi-protein complexes which are crucial for the integrity and function of the epithelial barrier as they not only link cells but also form channels allowing permeation between cells, resulting in epithelial surfaces of different tightness. Tight junction's molecular composition, ultrastructure, and function are regulated differently with regard to physiological and pathological stimuli. Both in vivo and in vitro studies suggest that reduced tight junction integrity greatly results in a condition commonly known as "leaky gut". A loss of barrier integrity allows the translocation of luminal antigens (microbes, toxins) via the mucosa to access the whole body which are normally excluded and subsequently destroys the gut mucosal homeostasis, coinciding with an increased susceptibility to systemic infection, chronic inflammation and malabsorption. There is considerable evidence that the intestinal barrier dysfunction is an important factor contributing to the pathogenicity of some enteric bacteria. It has been shown that some enteric pathogens can induce permeability defects in gut epithelia by altering tight junction proteins, mediated by their toxins. Resolving the strategies that microorganisms use to hijack the functions of tight junctions is important for our understanding of microbial pathogenesis, because some pathogens can utilize tight junction proteins as receptors for attachment and subsequent internalization, while others modify or destroy the tight junction proteins by different pathways and thereby provide a gateway to the underlying tissue. This review aims to deliver an overview of the tight junction structures and function, and its role in enteric bacterial pathogenesis with a special focus on chickens. A main conclusion will be that the molecular mechanisms used by enteric pathogens to disrupt epithelial barrier function in chickens needs a much better understanding, explicitly highlighted for Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella enterica and Clostridium perfringens. This is a requirement in order to assist in discovering new strategies to avoid damages of the intestinal barrier or to minimize consequences from infections.Entities:
Keywords: chickens; enteric pathogens; gut health; intestinal barrier; leaky gut; paracellular permeability; tight junction
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28208612 PMCID: PMC5331439 DOI: 10.3390/toxins9020060
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Toxins (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6651 Impact factor: 4.546
In vitro and in vivo methods for measuring intestinal permeability.
| Procedure | In Vivo | In Vitro | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| direct measurement of intestinal permeability | Cr51-EDTA (0.34 kDa) | FITC dextrans (4–2000 kDa) | Bjarnason et al. [ |
| indirect measurement of intestinal permeability | TJ proteins | - | Bjarnason et al. [ |
Figure 1Schematic outline of the principle pathways (transcellular and paracellular) of translocation across the intestinal epithelium with tight junction proteins. JAM = Junctional adhesion molecule, CAR = Coxsackie virus and adenovirus receptor, ZO = Zonula occludens (adapted from Ulluwishewa et al. [24]).
Interaction of enteropathogenic Escherichia coli with tight junctions.
| Pathogen/Mechanism | In Vivo/In Vitro | Effects | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| EPEC dephosphorylates and dissociates occludin | in vitro | contraction of the perijunctional actomyosin ring | Simonovic et al. [ |
| EPEC redistributes occludin | in vivo | disruption of ion transport | Shifflet et al. [ |
| EPEC induces redistribution of ZO-1 and occludin | in vivo | increase in paracellular permeability | Zhang et al. [ |
| EPEC alters the distribution of the TJ protein ZO-1 | in vitro | alteration of barrier and transport functions | Philpott et al. [ |
Interaction of Campylobacter with tight junctions.
| Pathogen/Mechanism | In Vivo/In Vitro | Effects | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| in vivo | perturbation of TJ by increasing intestinal permeability | Awad et al. [ | |
| in vitro | decrease in transepithelial electrical resistance | Dodson [ | |
| in vivo | promotes the translocation of non-invasive bacteria across the intestinal epithelium | Kalischuk et al. [ | |
| in vitro | increase in transepithelial permeability | Lamb-Rosteski et al. [ | |
| in vivo | alteration of barrier and transport functions | Awad et al. [ |
Figure 2Pathophysiology of Campylobacter in chickens: translocation via transcellular (a) and paracellular pathways (b). Macrophages and dendritic cells (innate immune cells) recognize the pathogenic bacteria through molecular pattern-recognition receptors (Toll-like receptor, TLR) (c), change their functional status from tolerogenic to an activated phenotype. Activation of nuclear factor-κB (NF-kB) pathway stimulates gene transcription, resulting in increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, interleukins 1β, IL 6 and IL8) [95] (d). Campylobacter induces a disruption of tight junctions and the mucus film (e) with a higher permeability of the intestinal epithelium (f), resulting in an increased uptake of luminal antigens (e.g., microbes, and toxins). In addition, Campylobacter utilizes SCFAs as a source of carbon and energy in the intestine, consequently alters gut colonization dynamics and may also influence physiological processes due to altered microbial metabolite profiles [70] (g).
Interaction of Salmonella with tight junctions.
| Pathogen/Mechanism | In Vivo/In Vitro | Effects | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| in vitro | decrease in the trans-epithelial ion conductance | Awad et al. [ | |
| in vivo | disruption of the epithelial barrier function | Shao et al. [ | |
| in vivo | alteration of the intestinal mucosal barrier function | Zhang et al. [ | |
| in vitro | damage of the intestinal barrier function | Koehler et al. [ |
Figure 3Claudins-3 and -4 are the sites of Clostridium perfringens enterotoxin (CPE) binding (adapted from Günzel and Yu [121]).
Interaction of Clostridium perfringens with tight junctions.
| Pathogen/Mechanism | In Vivo/In Vitro | Effects | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| in vitro | decreases the trans-epithelial electrical resistance | Nava and Vidal [ | |
| in vivo | perturbation of TJ by an increased intestinal permeability | Otamiri [ | |
| in vivo | alteration of the intestinal barrier function by increasing intestinal permeability | Collier et al. [ | |
| in vitro | impairment of TJ barrier function | Saitoh et al. [ |