| Literature DB >> 31823789 |
Audrey Dumesnil1,2, Léa Martelet1,2, Daniel Grenier2,3, Jean-Philippe Auger1,2, Josée Harel1,2, Eric Nadeau4, Marcelo Gottschalk5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Streptococcus suis is a major swine pathogen causing arthritis, meningitis and sudden death in post-weaning piglets and is also a zoonotic agent. S. suis comprises 35 different serotypes of which the serotype 2 is the most prevalent in both pigs and humans. In the absence of commercial vaccines, bacterins (mostly autogenous), are used in the field, with controversial results. In the past years, the focus has turned towards the development of sub-unit vaccine candidates. However, published results are sometimes contradictory regarding the protective effect of a same candidate. Moreover, the adjuvant used may significantly influence the protective capacity of a given antigen. This study focused on two protective candidates, the dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPPIV) and the enolase (SsEno). Both proteins are involved in S. suis pathogenesis, and while contradictory protection results have been obtained with SsEno in the past, no data on the protective capacity of DPPIV was available.Entities:
Keywords: Antibody production; Experimental design, bias; Mouse model; Protection; Streptococcus suis serotype 2; Sub-unit vaccines
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31823789 PMCID: PMC6905021 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-019-2196-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Fig. 1Recognition of enolase (A) and DPPIV (B) with specific antisera produced against theses antigens. The black arrows correspond to the purified protein and MW to the molecular weight ladder (lane 1)
Distribution of enolase and DPPIV among S. suis field strains
| Serotype | Number of strains | Number of positive strains for Enolase | Number of positive strains for DPPIV |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 23 | 23 | 23 |
| 1/2 | 30 | 26 | 29 |
| 2 | 93 | 73 | 80 |
| 3 | 18 | 14 | 14 |
| 4 | 21 | 20 | 18 |
| 5 | 7 | 5 | 4 |
| 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 7 | 18 | 15 | 16 |
| 8 | 17 | 17 | 16 |
| 9 | 31 | 26 | 30 |
| 10 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 13 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 |
| 15 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 16 | 9 | 8 | 7 |
| 17 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 18 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 19 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 20 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 21 | 5 | 4 | 4 |
| 22 | 15 | 13 | 13 |
| 23 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| 24 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| 25 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 27 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| 28 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| 29 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| 30 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| 31 | 3 | 2 | 2 |
| 32 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 33 | 4 | 4 | 2 |
| 34 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
Fig. 2The combination of rSsEno or rDPPIV with 4 different adjuvants is not protective against S. suis. Survival of the mice immunized with 50 μg of rSsEno (A) or rDPPIV (B) with either Polygen™, Montanide™ ISA 50 V2, Quil-A® or Stimune® adjuvants following challenge with S. suis 31533 strain. A control group (non-immunized) received 100 μL of phosphate-buffered saline
Fig. 3Titers of anti-Enolase antibody isotypes of mice immunized with rEnolase in combination with 4 adjuvants. Two 50 μg doses of rSsEno adjuvanted in Quil-A®, Polygen™, Stimune® or Montanide™ ISA 50 V2 were administered to mice. A control group (non-immunized) received 100 μL of phosphate-buffered saline. Isotypes were detected in sera twelve days after the first (Dose 1) and the second (Dose 2) vaccination. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean. * (p < 0.05) indicates a significant difference between non-immunized and dose 1. # (p < 0.05) indicates a significant difference between dose 1 and dose 2 and a (p < 0.05) between treated groups (adjuvants) for the second immunization (Dose 2)
Fig. 4Titers of anti-DPPIV antibody isotypes of mice immunized with rDPPIV in combination with 4 adjuvants. Two 50 μg doses of rDPPIV adjuvanted in Quil-A®, Polygen™, Stimune® or Montanide™ ISA 50 V2 were administered to mice. A control group (non-immunized) received 100 μL of phosphate-buffered saline. Isotypes were detected in sera twelve days after the first (Dose 1) and the second (Dose 2) vaccination. Data are expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean. * (p < 0.05) indicates a significant difference between non-immunized and dose 1. # (p < 0.05) indicates a significant difference between dose 1 and dose 2 and a (p < 0.05) between treated groups (adjuvants) for the second immunization (Dose 2)
Bacterial strains and plasmids used in this study
| Strains/plasmids | General characteristics | Source/reference |
|---|---|---|
| TOP10 | F− mrcA Δ(mrr-hsdRMS-mcrBC) φ80 lacZΔM15 ΔlacX74 recA1 araD139 Δ(ara-leu) 7697 galU galK rpsL (StrR) endA1 nupG | Invitrogen |
| BL21 | F−ompT hsdSB (rB−, mB−) gal dcm rne131 (DE3) | Invitrogen |
| 31533 | Virulent European serotype 2 ST1 strain isolated from pig with meningitis | ( |
| Δ | Isogenic mutant strain derived from P1/7 strain. In frame deletion of | ( |
| Group B | ||
| COH-1 | Capsular type III strain isolated from an infant with bacteremia | ( |
| Plasmids | ||
| pET-32a | Apr, pBR322 | Novagen |
| pBAD/thio | Apr, pUC | Invitrogen |
| pET-32aEnolase | pET-32a carrying | This work |
| pBAD/thioDPPIV | pBAD/thio-TOPO carrying dppIV gene for protein production | This work |