| Literature DB >> 31428075 |
Siyu Wu1, Junsheng Zhang1, Jianni Huang1, Weiqiang Li1, Zhiting Liu1, Zhuoliang He1, Zuxian Chen1, Wanting He1, Bingbing Zhao1, Zhifeng Qin2, Peirong Jiao1, Ming Liao1.
Abstract
Clade 2.3.4.4 H5 avian influenza viruses (AIVs) are widely prevalent and of significant concern to the poultry industry and public health in China. Nowadays, the clade 2.3.4.4 H5N6 virus has become a dominant AIV subtype among domestic ducks in southern China. We found that waterfowl-origin clade 2.3.4.4 H5N6 viruses (A/goose/Guangdong/16568/2016, GS16568 and A/duck/Guangdong/16873/2016, DK16873) isolated from southern China in 2016 could replicate in multiple organs of inoculated ducks. DK16873 virus caused mild infections and killed 2/5 of inoculated ducks, and GS16568 virus did not kill inoculated ducks. In addition, the two viruses could be transmitted via direct contact between ducks. DK16873 and GS16568 viruses killed 2/5 and 1/5 of contact ducks, respectively. Furthermore, ducks inoculated with the two H5N6 viruses exhibited different expressions of immune-related genes in their lungs. The expression of RIG-I, TLR3 and IL6 was significantly upregulated at 12 h post-inoculation (HPI) and most of the tested immune-related genes were significantly upregulated at 3 days post-inoculation (DPI). Notably, the expression of RIG-I and IL-6 in response to DK16873 virus was significantly higher than for GS16568 virus at 12 HPI and 3 DPI. Our research have provided helpful information about the pathogenicity, transmission and immune-related genes expression in ducks infected with new H5N6 AIVs.Entities:
Keywords: H5N6 avian influenza virus; duck; immune-related genes; pathogenicity; transmission
Year: 2019 PMID: 31428075 PMCID: PMC6687855 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01782
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Primer sequences used in the quantitative real-time PCR.
| TLR7 | F: CCTTTCCCAGAGAGCATTCA | AY940195 |
| R: TCAAGAAATATCAAGATAATCACATCA | ||
| TLR3 | F: GAGTTTCACACAGGATGTTTAC | JQ910167 |
| R: GTGAGATTTGTTCCTTGCAG | ||
| RIG-I | F: CTGGCAGAAGCAATTGAGAAC | EU363349 |
| R: TGCTGAATCTCTTCACACTCC | ||
| MDA5 | F: CTTGCAGATGATTTAAGTGGA | KJ451070 |
| R: CTTCACTACAGAATGTCCTGG | ||
| IFN-α | F: TCCTCCAACACCTCTTCGAC | KF731866 |
| R: GGGCTGTAGGTGTGGTTCTG | ||
| IFN-β | F: CAGCATCAACAAGTACTTCA | KM035791 |
| R: CTTCCGAAGTGGCTGGGAGA | ||
| Mx | F: CCAGACCTGACACTAATTGAT | KR025554 |
| R: CACATTACATGGCACCACTAC | ||
| IL6 | F: CAGACCTACCTTGAATACGTA | AB191038 |
| R: AGCTGAATCTGGGATGACCAC | ||
| IL8 | F: CCGGTGCCAGTGCATAAGCAC | DQ393274 |
| R: ATGATTTCAACGTTCTTGCAG | ||
| MHCI | F: GAAGGAAGAGACTTCATTGCCTTGG | AB115246 |
| R: CTCTCCTCTCCAGTACGTCCTTCC | ||
| GAPDH | F: ATGTTCGTGATGGGTGTGAA | AY436595 |
| R: CTGTCTTCGTGTGTGGCTGT |
Illness and mortality of ducks after inoculated with H5N6 influenza viruses.
| GS16568 | 7.00 | Inoculatedb | 0/5 | 0/5 | ||
| Contactc | 0/5 | 1/5 | 4.0 | 6.50 ± 0 | ||
| DK16873 | 8.83 | Inoculated | 3/5 | 2/5 | 5.5 | 6.50 ± 0 |
| Contact | 2/5 | 2/5 | 5.5 | 5.88 ± 0.38 |
FIGURE 1Relative expression of Pattern-recognition receptors (PRRs) in the lung of ducks inoculated with GS16568 and DK16873 viruses. At 12 h post-inoculation (HPI) and 3 days post-inoculation (DPI), qRT-PCR were used to quantified the expression of PRRs in the lungs of H5N6 virus-infected ducks, that were expressed relative to the geometric mean of expression in control ducks. (A)TLR7, (B) TLR3, (C) RIG-I, and (D) MDA5. Each dot represents one duck. Each dot represents the level of target gene mRNA relative to mock after normalizing to GAPDH. Statistical analysis was performed using a paired Student’s t-test (*p < 0.05, ∗∗p < 0.01).
FIGURE 3Relative expression of MHC-I in the lung of ducks inoculated with GS16568 and DK16873 viruses. At 12 HPI and 3 DPI, qRT-PCR were used to quantified the expression of MHC-I in the lungs of H5N6 virus-infected ducks, that were expressed relative to the geometric mean of expression in control ducks. Each dot represents one duck. Each dot represents the level of target gene mRNA relative to mock after normalizing to GAPDH. Statistical analysis was performed using a paired Student’s t-test (*p < 0.05, ∗∗p < 0.01).
Replication of H5N6 avian influenza viruses in ducks.
| GS16568 | 12 HPI | 1.58 ± 0.14 | NDb | 2.00 ± 0.20 | 1.58 ± 0.14 | ND | 2.50 ± 1.73 | 3.50 ± 0.25 | 2.25 ± 0.87 | 1.75 ± 0.43 |
| 3 DPI | 5.50 ± 1.75 | 6.42 ± 0.14 | 5.33 ± 0.88 | 6.50 ± 0 | 4.17 ± 0.80 | 5.58 ± 0.88 | 5.42 ± 0.76 | 3.92 ± 1.51 | 5.83 ± 0.58 | |
| 5 DPI | 4.50 ± 1.75 | 5.17 ± 1.28 | 3.75 ± 2.17 | 4.67 ± 1.61 | 2.75 ± 1.39 | 3.92 ± 1.42 | 4.58 ± 2.70 | 2.50 ± 1.52 | 5.08 ± 1.51 | |
| DK16873 | 12 HPI | 2.83 ± 1.18 | 3.00 ± 1.39 | 3.83 ± 1.84 | 2.17 ± 0.63 | ND | 2.33 ± 1.01 | 3.58 ± 1.01 | 2.25 ± 1.09 | 2.50 ± 0 |
| 3 DPI | 4.58 ± 1.01 | 5.58 ± 1.15 | 5.58 ± 0.88 | 4.50 ± 0.25 | 4.50 ± 0.25 | 5.42 ± 0.14 | 6.17 ± 0.58 | 4.33 ± 1.04 | 6.50 ± 0 | |
| 5 DPI | 4.42 ± 1.13 | 5.83 ± 0.58 | 4.08 ± 1.04 | 5.42 ± 0.14 | 4.42 ± 1.59 | 5.50 ± 0 | 6.17 ± 0.38 | 4.92 ± 0.52 | 5.33 ± 0.14 | |
Viral shedding in cloacal and oropharyngeal swabs from inoculated and contacted ducks.
| GS16568 | Inoculateda | 11/11 | 10/11 | 7/8 | 2/8 | 2/5 | 2/5 | 3/5 | 1/5 | 0/5 | 0/5 | 0/5 | 0/5 |
| Contactedb | 5/5 | 5/5 | 3/4 | 0/4 | 3/4 | 3/4 | 1/4 | 0/4 | 0/4 | 1/4 | 2/4 | 0/4 | |
| DK16873 | Inoculated | 11/11 | 11/11 | 6/8 | 6/8 | 3/3 | 2/3 | 1/3 | 0/3 | 0/3 | 0/3 | 0/3 | 0/3 |
| Contacted | 5/5 | 5/5 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 3/3 | 3/3 | 3/3 | 1/3 | 2/3 | 2/3 | 0/3 | 0/3 | |
FIGURE 2Relative expression of IFNs, proinflammatory cytokines, and ISGs in the lung of ducks inoculated with GS16568 and DK16873 viruses. At 12 HPI and 3 DPI, qRT-PCR were used to quantified the expression of IFNs, proinflammatory cytokines and ISGs in the lungs of H5N6 virus-infected ducks, that were expressed relative to the geometric mean of expression in control ducks. (A) IFNα, (B) IFN-β, (C) IL-6, (D) IL-8, and (E) Mx. Each dot represents one duck. Each dot represents the level of target gene mRNA relative to mock after normalizing to GAPDH. Statistical analysis was performed using a paired Student’s t-test (*p < 0.05, ∗∗p < 0.01).