| Literature DB >> 31588159 |
Christopher H Taylor1, Stuart Young1,2, Jonathan Fenn1, Angela L Lamb3, Ann E Lowe1, Benoit Poulin1, Andrew D C MacColl1, Janette E Bradley1.
Abstract
The ability, propensity and need to mount an immune response vary both among individuals and within a single individual over time.A wide array of parameters has been found to influence immune state in carefully controlled experiments, but we understand much less about which of these parameters are important in determining immune state in wild populations.Diet can influence immune responses, for example when nutrient availability is limited. We therefore predict that natural dietary variation will play a role in modulating immune state, but this has never been tested.We measured carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios in an island population of house mice Mus musculus domesticus as an indication of dietary variation, and the expression of a range of immune-related genes to represent immune state.After accounting for potential confounding influences such as age, sex and helminth load, we found a significant association between carbon isotope ratio and levels of immune activity in the mesenteric lymph nodes, particularly in relation to the inflammatory response.This association demonstrates the important interplay between diet and an animal's response to immune challenges, and therefore potentially its susceptibility to disease. A plain language summary is available for this article. 2019 The Authors. Functional Ecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.Entities:
Keywords: Diet; eco‐immunology; house mouse; immune response; stable isotope analysis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31588159 PMCID: PMC6767599 DOI: 10.1111/1365-2435.13354
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Funct Ecol ISSN: 0269-8463 Impact factor: 5.608
Figure 1Approximate trapping locations on the Isle of May, along with the location of the isle within Scotland (inset). BL: Burnett's Leap; BY: Byres; FS: Fluke Street; HR: Holyman's Road; HT: High Tarn; K: Kettle; LL: Low Light; ML: Main Light; PR: Priory ruins; RO: Rona; SH: South Horn; TTN: Three Tarn Nick
Figure 2Triplot from a redundancy analysis of expression of immune‐related genes in the MLNs. Solid arrows indicate predictor variables, with **p < 0.001. Dashed arrows and italic labels indicate response variables. Grey crosses represent individual mice
Correlations of predictor (ecological) and response (MLN gene expression) variables with RDA1 from a redundancy analysis. Variables are ordered by the magnitude of their correlation
| Predictor | RDA1 | Gene | RDA1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| δ13C | −0.964 |
| 0.482 |
| Leptin | 0.267 |
| 0.393 |
| Age (days) | −0.187 |
| 0.387 |
|
| 0.117 |
| 0.368 |
| δ15N | 0.115 |
| 0.356 |
|
| 0.106 |
| 0.318 |
| Sex (male) | 0.075 |
| 0.245 |
|
| 0.144 | ||
|
| 0.137 | ||
|
| 0.023 | ||
|
| −0.005 |
Figure 3Variation in circulating leptin concentration with carbon isotope values. Points represent individual mice, and line shows model prediction with grey shading for ±SE
Final coefficients for linear models of two condition variables (leptin concentration and Scaled Mass Index (SMI)) after model selection and averaging. Coefficients highlighted in bold are those for which the 95% confidence interval does not include zero
| Term | Leptin | SMI | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | LCI | UCI | Weight | Coefficient | LCI | UCI | Weight | |
| Intercept | −2.69 | −9.78 | 4.40 | NA | 20.2 | 14.3 | 26.1 | NA |
| δ13C |
|
|
| 1 | −0.012 | −0.218 | 0.194 | 0.086 |
| δ15N | −0.034 | −0.197 | 0.129 | 0.252 | ||||
| Sex | −0.114 | −0.798 | 0.571 | 0.201 | ||||
| Age | 0.0005 | −0.0026 | 0.0037 | 0.185 | 0.0003 | −0.0035 | 0.0041 | 0.091 |
|
| 0.018 | −0.171 | 0.206 | 0.139 | 0.23 | −0.65 | 1.10 | 0.345 |
|
| −0.180 | −0.676 | 0.315 | 0.5 | ||||
LCI: lower 95% confidence interval; UCI: upper 95% confidence interval.
Final coefficients for linear models of δ13C and δ15N after model selection and averaging. Coefficients highlighted in bold are those for which the 95% confidence interval does not include zero
| Term | δ13C | δ15N | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | LCI | UCI | Weight | Coefficient | LCI | UCI | Weight | |
| Intercept | −25.6 | −25.8 | −25.3 | NA | 12.4 | 10.7 | 14.1 | NA |
| Sex | −0.014 | −0.184 | 0.156 | 0.139 |
|
|
| 1.00 |
| Age | 0.00037 | −0.00192 | 0.00265 | 0.194 | 0 | |||
| Puffins | 0.00001 | −0.00011 | 0.00014 | 0.151 | 0 | |||
| Vegetation ( | −0.018 | −0.185 | 0.150 | 0.151 | 1.10 | −0.96 | 3.15 | 0.65 |
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 1.00 | |||
|
| 0 | 0 | ||||||
LCI: lower 95% confidence interval; UCI: upper 95% confidence interval.
Figure 4Variation in mouse nitrogen isotope values among trapping locations. Points show the mean value for each of the 11 locations, and vertical lines show ±SE. Letter codes refer to the sampling locations detailed in Figure 1, with sample size in brackets. Also shown are the density of occupied puffin burrows (x‐axis) and the dominant vegetation type (Silene uniflora, open circles; Holcus lanatus, filled circles). Of the variables shown here, only location explained a significant proportion of variation in δ15N values