| Literature DB >> 29354598 |
Valérie Rodrigues1,2, Bernard Fernandez1,2, Arthur Vercoutere1,2, Léo Chamayou1,2, Alexandre Andersen1,2, Oana Vigy3, Edith Demettre4, Martial Seveno4, Rosalie Aprelon1,5, Ken Giraud-Girard1,5, Frédéric Stachurski1,2, Etienne Loire1,2, Nathalie Vachiéry1,2,5, Philippe Holzmuller1,2.
Abstract
The tropical bont tick, Amblyomma variegatum, is a tick species of veterinary importance and is considered as one of major pest of ruminants in Africa and in the Caribbean. It causes direct skin lesions, transmits heartwater, and reactivates bovine dermatophilosis. Tick saliva is reported to affect overall host responses through immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory molecules, among other bioactive molecules. The general objective of this study was to better understand the role of saliva in interaction between the Amblyomma tick and the host using cellular biology approaches and proteomics, and to discuss its impact on disease transmission and/or activation. We first focused on the immuno-modulating effects of semi-fed A. variegatum female saliva on bovine peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and monocyte-derived macrophages in vitro. We analyzed its immuno-suppressive properties by measuring the effect of saliva on PBMC proliferation, and observed a significant decrease in ConA-stimulated PBMC lymphoproliferation. We then studied the effect of saliva on bovine macrophages using flow cytometry to analyze the expression of MHC-II and co-stimulation molecules (CD40, CD80, and CD86) and by measuring the production of nitric oxide (NO) and pro- or anti-inflammatory cytokines. We observed a significant decrease in the expression of MHC-II, CD40, and CD80 molecules, associated with decreased levels of IL-12-p40 and TNF-α and increased level of IL-10, which could explain the saliva-induced modulation of NO. To elucidate these immunomodulatory effects, crude saliva proteins were analyzed using proteomics with an Orbitrap Elite mass spectrometer. Among the 336 proteins identified in A. variegatum saliva, we evidenced bioactive molecules exhibiting anti-inflammatory, immuno-modulatory, and anti-oxidant properties (e.g., serpins, phospholipases A2, heme lipoprotein). We also characterized an intriguing ubiquitination complex that could be involved in saliva-induced immune modulation of the host. We propose a model for the interaction between A. variegatum saliva and host immune cells that could have an effect during tick feeding by favoring pathogen dissemination or activation by reducing the efficiency of host immune response to the corresponding tick-borne diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Amblyomma variegatum; PBMC; immuno-modulation; proteomics; tick saliva
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29354598 PMCID: PMC5759025 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00521
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol ISSN: 2235-2988 Impact factor: 5.293
Figure 1Effect of A. variegatum saliva on ConA-induced proliferation of bovine PBMC. Bovine PBMC were stimulated with ConA alone or with different concentrations of A. variegatum saliva for 72 h. PBMC responses of cells in contact with ConA and saliva were compared to PBMC in contact with ConA alone (control) to calculate “relative PBMC activation.” Data are means of triplicate experiments, for each batch of saliva for the three animals tested. Blue lines and shading show respectively the linear regression fit and the 0.95 confidence interval. The p-value of the model is indicated on the panel.
Figure 2Effect of A. variegatum saliva on the expression of surface markers on LPS-stimulated bovine macrophages. Bovine blood monocyte-derived macrophages were pre-stimulated for 1 h with LPS, and then for an additional 24 h with different concentrations of A. variegatum saliva. Cells were collected and stained for surface markers. Expression levels (mean of fluorescence intensity, MFI) of MHC II, CD40, CD80, and CD86 markers on macrophages compared with unstimulated control cells were measured by flow cytometry. Data are means of triplicate experiments, for a pool of saliva batches for the three animals tested. Blue lines and shading show the linear regression fit and the 0.95 confidence interval, respectively. The p-value of the model is indicated on the panel.
Figure 3Effect of A. variegatum saliva on the production of NO and cytokines by LPS-stimulated bovine macrophages. Bovine blood monocyte-derived macrophages were pre-stimulated for 1 h with LPS, and then for an additional 24 h with different concentrations of A. variegatum saliva. Cell culture supernatants were collected and NO production was titrated by the Griess method, IL-10, IL-12, and TNF-α production were titrated by ELISA. Data are means of triplicate experiments, for a pool of saliva batches for the three animals tested. Blue lines and shading show the linear regression fit and the 0.95 confidence interval, respectively. The p-value of the model is indicated on the panel.
Figure 4Graphic representation of cellular role (A) and selected gene ontology (GO) categories (B) attributed to proteins identified in the saliva of A. variegatum by the ProtFun 2.2 Server (http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/services/ProtFun/). The function prediction server produces ab initio predictions of protein function from sequences by querying a large number of other feature prediction servers to obtain information on different post-translational and localizational aspects of the protein, which are integrated into final predictions of the cellular role, enzyme class (if any), and selected gene ontology categories of the sequence submitted.
Potential immunomodulatory proteins identified in A. variegatum saliva.
| Protein related to Da-p36 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 29.7 | 27.443 | ||
| Antigen-5 family member (Fragment) | 1 | 2 | 2 | 32.7 | 12.308 | ||
| Serpin (Fragment) | 6 | 11 | 9 | 59.3 | 23.07 | ||
| Serpin (Fragment) | 1 | 5 | 5 | 57.1 | 17.759 | ||
| Serpin (Fragment) | 1 | 2 | 1 | 29.1 | 17.208 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 14 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 14.7 | 44.703 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 13 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 12.1 | 42.841 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 27 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7.6 | 43.538 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 7 (Fragment) | 1 | 2 | 2 | 7.5 | 35.74 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 33 (Fragment) | 1 | 2 | 2 | 8.5 | 26.402 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 12 (Fragment) | 3 | 2 | 2 | 7.8 | 46.875 | ||
| Putative tick serpins 13 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 9.3 | 42.797 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (tick serpins 27) | 15 | 3 | 1 | 9.6 | 43.103 | ||
| Kazal-type serine protease inhibitor domain protein | 4 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 26.71 | ||
| Putative serine protease inhibitor | 2 | 6 | 6 | 18.5 | 46.98 | ||
| Putative serine protease inhibitor | 2 | 6 | 6 | 18.5 | 46.98 | ||
| Putative serine protease inhibitor | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5.1 | 44.715 | ||
| Putative serine proteinase inhibitor | 2 | 2 | 1 | 8.4 | 43.504 | ||
| Putative thyropin | 6 | 2 | 2 | 12.4 | 22.395 | ||
| Putative thyropin | 7 | 3 | 3 | 12.7 | 22.532 | ||
| Trypsin-like serine protease (Fragment) | 1 | 6 | 6 | 41.1 | 21.867 | ||
| Trypsin-like serine protease (Fragment) | 3 | 6 | 4 | 48.9 | 19.618 | ||
| Putative serine carboxypeptidase lysosomal cathepsin a | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5.2 | 53.097 | ||
| Cathepsin L-like cysteine proteinase B | 8 | 10 | 9 | 36.8 | 37.624 | ||
| Cysteine proteinase cathepsin L (Fragment) | 2 | 5 | 5 | 38.6 | 23.017 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (Fragment) (peptidase C1 family; cathepsin l-like cysteine proteinase b) | 3 | 2 | 1 | 11.5 | 38.867 | ||
| Ferritin | 2 | 3 | 3 | 19.5 | 22.296 | ||
| Heme lipoprotein (Fragment) | 2 | 33 | 22 | 63.5 | 50.007 | ||
| Heme lipoprotein (Fragment) | 1 | 20 | 18 | 67.4 | 27.005 | ||
| Hemelipoglycoprotein (Fragment) | 1 | 14 | 14 | 48.2 | 24.787 | ||
| Heme lipoprotein (Fragment) | 1 | 11 | 8 | 95.4 | 14.828 | ||
| Heme lipoprotein | 1 | 31 | 5 | 16.3 | 177.04 | ||
| Hemelipoglycoprotein. putative | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1.7 | 177.65 | ||
| Hemelipoglycoprotein. putative (Fragment) | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1.3 | 172.44 | ||
| Calreticulin | 1 | 4 | 1 | 16.3 | 47.318 | ||
| Calreticulin | 17 | 4 | 1 | 16.3 | 47.241 | ||
| Calponin | 6 | 3 | 3 | 24.7 | 17.614 | ||
| Putative lipocal-1 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.5 | 24.71 | ||
| Putative phospholipase a2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 11.4 | 44.79 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (Putative gtp-binding protein) | 10 | 2 | 2 | 12.4 | 24.689 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (gtp-binding protein) | 4 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 22.968 | ||
| Putative zinc-binding protein of the histidine triad hit family | 3 | 1 | 1 | 11.1 | 13.53 | ||
| Putative glutathione s-transferase mu class | 7 | 6 | 6 | 29.1 | 25.713 | ||
| Putative glutathione s-transferase | 2 | 2 | 2 | 14.7 | 24.394 | ||
| Putative glutathione s-transferase | 5 | 2 | 2 | 10.4 | 26.241 | ||
| Putative glutathione s-transferase | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5.5 | 24.303 | ||
| Putative glutathione s-transferase | 4 | 1 | 1 | 8.9 | 23.244 | ||
| Putative glutathione s-transferase | 4 | 1 | 1 | 8.6 | 27.412 | ||
| Glutathione S-transferase. putative | 4 | 1 | 1 | 12.2 | 8.6628 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (glutathione s-transferase | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5.9 | 26.159 | ||
| Protein disulfide-isomerase | 8 | 3 | 3 | 7.2 | 54.923 | ||
| Protein disulfide-isomerase | 5 | 4 | 1 | 9.2 | 57.252 | ||
| Putative alkyl hydroperoxide reductase thiol specific antioxidant (Fragment) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10.7 | 23.542 | ||
| Putative thioredoxin peroxidase | 14 | 4 | 4 | 24 | 20.494 | ||
| Putative selenoprotein w 2a | 1 | 1 | 1 | 22.1 | 8.6959 | ||
| Peroxidasin (Fragment) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8.1 | 27.07 | ||
| Superoxide dismutase [Cu-Zn] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9.7 | 15.744 | ||
| Putative heat shock protein (Fragment) | 11 | 16 | 13 | 35.6 | 73.124 | ||
| Putative heat shock protein 90 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 13.5 | 84.001 | ||
| Putative heat shock protein 70 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 10.5 | 73.014 | ||
| Putative heat shock protein | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5.7 | 21.73 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (heat shock 70 kDa protein 5) | 7 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 69.078 | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (heat shock protein) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7.8 | 21.722 | ||
Potential ubiquitination complex identified in A. variegatum saliva.
| Ubiquitin (Fragment) | 12 | 2 | 2 | 29.8 | 9.4959 | – | – | ||
| Putative microtubule associated complex (Fragment) | 2 | 12 | 9 | 14.1 | 117.06 | 5.38 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 (A1S9 protein). | ||
| Putative nidogen (Fragment) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.2 | 124.2 | 6.21 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 homolog (D8) | ||
| Alpha-macroglobulin. putative (Fragment) | 1 | 8 | 1 | 7 | 121.21 | 4.83–5.37 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 | ||
| Netrin-4. putative | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5.1 | 41.593 | 7.21 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 X (Fragment) | ||
| Hemolectin. putative (Fragment) | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2.4 | 115.88 | 5.66–5.67 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 | ||
| Uncharacterized protein (Fragment) | 3 | 28 | 1 | 32.3 | 131.52 | 4.90–5.42 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 | ||
| Alpha-2-macroglobulin (Fragment) | 2 | 5 | 2 | 42.6 | 19.026 | 8.69–10.05 (94% > x > 80%) | Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme E2-24 kDa (EC 6.3.2.19) | ||
| Putative secreted protein (Fragment) | 1 | 3 | 3 | 12.2 | 21.619 | 11.17 (80%) | Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme E2-24 kDa (EC 6.3.2.19) | ||
| Putative I. scapularis glutathione peroxidase (Fragment) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12.8 | 10.918 | 11.13–12.43 (80% > x > 68%) | Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme variant MMS2 homolog (UEV MMS2) | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (alpha crystallins?) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13.1 | 19.912 | 9.69 (87%) | Ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme E2-24 kDa (EC 6.3.2.19) | ||
| Spectrin alpha chain. putative | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 272.3 | – | – | ||
| Putative vitellogenin-1 (Fragment) | 1 | 38 | 10 | 28.4 | 153.63 | 6.12–7.44 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 15 (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
| Putative vitellogenin-1 (Fragment) | 2 | 34 | 6 | 30.6 | 123.4 | 6.42–6.80 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 15 (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
| Putative titin (Fragment) | 2 | 21 | 15 | 10.4 | 389.34 | 7.13 (99.6%) | Probable ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase FAF (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
| Putative peroxinectin I. scapularis peroxinectin (Fragment) | 1 | 16 | 3 | 32.1 | 87.425 | 5.42 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 20 (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
| Putative neurexin iii-alpha (Fragment) | 1 | 9 | 9 | 8.4 | 158.55 | 5.72 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 19 (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
| Putative extracellular matrix glycoprotein laminin subunit beta (Fragment) | 1 | 9 | 4 | 15.7 | 92.371 | 5.25 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 20 (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
| Type II transmembrane protein. putative | 1 | 6 | 6 | 2.6 | 319.6 | 5.79 (99.6%) | Probable ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase FAF (EC 3.1.2.15 | ||
| Peroxinectin. putative | 1 | 4 | 1 | 6.7 | 90.84 | 5.18 (99.6%) | Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase 20 (EC 3.1.2.15) | ||
Propsearch-defined potential immunomodulatory proteins identified in A. variegatum saliva.
| RAS oncogene family member RAB1 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 16.156 | 5.65–7.34 (99.6%) | GTP-binding protein | ||
| Putative his-rich 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 14.9 | 15.48 | 1.08–2.02 (99.9 > x > 99.6%) | Superoxide dismutase [Mn-Fe] (EC 1.15.1.1) (Fragment) | ||
| Carboxypeptidase | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2.6 | 52.321 | 5.60 (99.6%) | Dopachrome tautomerase precursor (EC 5.3.3.12) (DT) (DCT) | ||
| Putative uncharacterized protein (Putative alpha crystallins?) | 8 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 28.586 | 3.77–7.18 (99.6%) | 60S ribosomal protein L3 | ||
| Putative beta-spectrin (Fragment) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0.8 | 205.72 | 5.14–5.44 (99.6%) | Spectrin alpha chain | ||
Figure 5Synthetic view of A. variegatum salivary-induced modulation of bovine immune cells Molecular determinants (with immunomodulatory properties identified by proteomics) driving cellular events (inhibition of lymphocyte proliferation, modulation of macrophage activation) evidenced in the study are summarized in the scheme.