| Literature DB >> 35000619 |
David Minich1, Christopher Madden1, Mauricio A Navarro2,3, Leo Glowacki4, Kristen French-Kim1, Willow Chan5, Morgan V Evans1,6, Kilmer Soares1,7, Ryan Mrofchak1, Rushil Madan1, Gregory A Ballash1, Krista LaPerle1,8, Subhadeep Paul4, Yael Vodovotz5, Francisco A Uzal2, Margaret Martinez1,9, Jennifer Hausmann10, Randall E Junge11, Vanessa L Hale12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Enteritis is a common cause of morbidity and mortality in lorikeets that can be challenging to diagnose and treat. In this study, we examine gut microbiota in two lorikeet flocks with enteritis (Columbus Zoo and Aquarium-CZA; Denver Zoo-DZ). Since 2012, the CZA flock has experienced repeated outbreaks of enteritis despite extensive diet, husbandry, and clinical modifications. In 2018, both CZA and DZ observed a spike in enteritis. Recent research has revealed that the gut microbiota can influence susceptibility to enteropathogens. We hypothesized that a dysbiosis, or alteration in the gut microbial community, was making some lorikeets more susceptible to enteritis, and our goal was to characterize this dysbiosis and determine the features that predicted susceptibility.Entities:
Keywords: Clostridium; Enteritis; Gut microbiota; Lorikeets; Trypsin
Year: 2022 PMID: 35000619 PMCID: PMC8744333 DOI: 10.1186/s42523-021-00148-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anim Microbiome ISSN: 2524-4671
Columbus Zoo and Aquarium (CZA) Lorikeet Demographics. Number and percent of Columbus Zoo & Aquarium lorikeets that ever or never had enteritis between Nov. 2018 and Sept. 2019 by sex, age, and lorikeet species
| Lorikeets that had one or more episodes of enteritis between Nov. 2018-Sept. 2019 | Lorikeets that never had enteritis between Nov. 2018-Sept. 2019 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (n, %) | |||
| Male | 9 (13.4%) | 14 (20.9%) | |
| Female | 11 (16.4%) | 14 (20.9%) | |
| Unknown | 14 (20.9%) | 5 (7.5%) | |
| Age (n, %) | |||
| 0–2 years | 19 (28.3%) | 7 (10.4%) | |
| 3–5 years | 7 (10.4%) | 16 (23.9%) | |
| 6–10 years | 6 (9.0%) | 6 (9.0%) | |
| > 11 years | 2 (3.0%) | 4 (6.0%) | |
| Species (n, %) | |||
| Rainbow | 8 (11.9%) | 17 (25.4%) | |
| Coconut | 23 (34.3%) | 13 (19.4%) | |
| Marigold | 1 (1.5%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Lory | 2 (3%) | 3 (4.5%) |
Fig. 1Seasonality in enteritis and gut microbiota in healthy lorikeets a Number of enteritis cases by month in Columbus Zoo and Aquarium lorikeets. Enteritis samples collected from the same bird within two weeks of the initial enteritis sample were considered a single case. Enteritis samples collected beyond 2 weeks from the initial sample in the same bird were counted as a second case of enteritis. Columbus Zoo & Aquarium healthy birds only: b Microbial community composition (Weighted UniFrac) and c diversity (Observed Features) by season (November 2018, February 2019, September 2019). There were significant shifts in microbial composition by season (PERMANOVA p = 0.001), and microbial diversity decreased significantly between November 2018 and September 2019 (Kruskal–Wallis *p < 0.001, **p < 0.0001). (Also see Additional file 6)
Fig. 2Microbial community analysis in CZA lorikeets with enteritis. Microbial composition and diversity in healthy lorikeets, lorikeets with enteritis, and lorikeets that died or were euthanized due to enteritis (postmortem). a Microbial composition (Weighted UniFrac) was significantly altered (PERMANOVA p = 0.001) and b microbial diversity (Observed Features) was significantly decreased (Kruskal–Wallis *p < 0.0005, **p < 1 × 10–9) in lorikeets with enteritis or postmortem lorikeets. (Also see Additional file 7). c The relative abundance of Clostridium perfringens was significantly increased in lorikeets with enteritis across all birds (ANCOM, W = 1098) and across matched birds (ANCOM, W = 788). “All birds” included samples from healthy birds that never got enteritis. “Matched birds” included only 25 birds that had both enteritis and healthy samples. n = number of samples as most birds were sampled multiple times across healthy timepoints (3 flock surveys) and some birds had more than one case of enteritis
Intestinal content isolates from CZA lorikeets
| Bird ID | Intestinal contents, growth in culture? | MALDI identification | Inferred | Selected for susceptibility testing? | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 104073 | No | None | ||||
| 113096 | Yes | + | + | A | ||
| 115057 | No | None | ||||
| 115069 | Yes | |||||
| 115094 | No | None | ||||
| 116046 | Yes | |||||
| 118064 | Yes | + | + | A | ||
| 118071 | Yes | + | + | A | Yes | |
| 118075 | Yes | + | + | A | Yes | |
| 118089 | Yes | + | + | A | ||
| 118115 | No | None | ||||
| 118118 | Yes | + | – | A | ||
| 118119 | Yes |
Lorikeet Demographics for CZA lorikeets submitted to pathology. The Freeman-Halton extension of the Fisher’s Exact test was used to calculate p values for sex and species. A Kruskal–Wallis test was used to calculate the p value for age
| Lorikeets with enteritis | Lorikeets with no enteritis | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (n, %) | |||
| Male | 12 (34.3%) | 5 (14.3%) | |
| Female | 12 (34.3%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Unknown | 4 (11.4%) | 2 (5.7%) | |
| Age (Mean ± SD) | 4.6 ± 4.7 | 9.3 ± 6.1 | |
| Species (n, %) | |||
| Rainbow | 7 (20%) | 5 (14.2%) | |
| Coconut | 14 (40%) | 1 (2.9%) | |
| Other | 7 (20%) | 1 (2.9%) |
Fig. 3CZA Lorikeet enteritis gross and histopathology. a Enteritis versus non-enteritis deaths by month (2015–2019). Cases were diagnosed histologically. b–d Gross necropsy findings typical of lorikeets with enteritis. b Feathers plucked demonstrating decreased pectoral muscle mass and prominent keel. c Formalin fixed tissues: severely dilated loops of intestines, including paired ceca, with thin intestinal walls and segments of thickened and nodular intestines. d Formalin fixed loop of small intestine: Mesentery thickened by pale tan tissue and nodules on the wall and serosa. e Hematoxylin & eosin stain (H&E) of chronic necrotizing enteritis in a lorikeet. Intestinal loops are markedly dilated with thinning of intestinal wall and replacement with fibrosis. Lumens impacted with coagulum of degenerate red blood cells, bacterial colonies and sloughed mucosa that compress the remaining atrophied and blunted intestinal villi. Inflammation on serosa and adjacent mesentery. f H&E of acute transmural necrotizing and ulcerative enteritis in a lorikeet. Sparse remaining mucosa characterized by large central ulcer, inflammatory cells including macrophages and heterophils throughout intestinal wall centered around the ulcer and overlying large colonies of bacteria. g Modified Brown-Hopps of f intestinal section. Superficially adhered bacterial colonies within the lesion are monomorphic large gram-positive bacilli. h H&E of enteritis: Little remaining mucosa with large central focus of ulceration, numerous heterophils and macrophages, followed by a layer of fibrin and degenerate red blood cells with admixed large bacterial colonies and sloughed necrotic mucosal epithelium. i Immunohistochemistry (IHC) against Clostridium perfringens from (h) intestinal section. Box indicates region in (j) under higher magnification. j IHC against C. perfringens within indicated region from (i). Light brown staining is non-specific labeling of sloughed necrotic mucosa and hemorrhage. Punctate dark brown staining indicates immunolabeling of bacteria within necrohemorrhagic coagulum and focus of ulceration
Toxin profiles, IHC, and C. colinum PCR on lorikeet intestines submitted to pathology
| Sample ID | Age (yrs) | Sex | Species | Acute/chronic | Status | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15-1444 | 3 | F | Rainbow | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 15-1455 | 14.7 | F | Rainbow | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 15-1456 | 5.4 | M | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 15-1636 | 11 | M | Rainbow | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 15-2050 | 0.8 | F | Lorikeet | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 18-1004 | 0.8 | F | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 18-1304 | 6 | M | Rainbow | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 18-1442 | 2 | M | Rainbow | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 18-1698 | 15.5 | F | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 18-950 | 2.1 | F | Lory | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 19-1164 | 1 | M | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 19-1220 | 1.3 | F | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 19-15 | 8.6 | F | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 19-183 | 0.8 | F | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 19-185 | 3.9 | F | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 19-427 | 0.6 | unk | Lorikeet | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 19-428 | 0.9 | unk | Coconut | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 19-488 | 15.6 | M | Rainbow | Acute | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 19-526 | 1 | unk | Coconut | Acute | No tissue | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 15-1681 | 4.8 | M | Coconut | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 15-1834 | 8.9 | M | Lorikeet | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 16-82 | 7 | M | Lorikeet | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 18-1561 | 2.8 | M | Violet necked | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 19-1241 | 1.3 | unk | Coconut | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | ||||
| 19-1242 | 3 | F | Marigold | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 19-863 | 5 | M | Rainbow | Chronic | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 15-1228 | 0.2 | M | Coconut | Chronic active | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 15-1230 | 0.2 | F | Coconut | Chronic active | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| 15-1226 | 11 | M | Rainbow | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| 16-426 | 0.2 | M | Lorikeet | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| 16-653 | 1 | unk | Coconut | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 17-150 | 12 | M | Rainbow | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| 17-1689 | 13 | M | Rainbow | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| 17-988 | 13 | unk | Rainbow | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| 19-1244 | 14.9 | M | Rainbow | NA | No lesions | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Bold text indicates lorikeets that were confirmed with enteritis based on histopathology
Fig. 4Altered microbial community diversity and composition in Denver Zoo (DZ) lorikeets with enteritis. Microbial composition and diversity in healthy lorikeets and lorikeets that died or were euthanized due to enteritis (“post-mortem” lorikeets). a Microbial composition (Weighted UniFrac) was significantly altered (PERMANOVA p = 0.001) and b microbial diversity (Observed Features) was significantly decreased (Kruskal–Wallis *p < 0.0005) in post-mortem lorikeets. (Also see Additional file 11). c The relative abundance of C. perfringens was also significantly increased in post-mortem lorikeets as compared to healthy lorikeets (ANCOM, W = 67). d Taxa bar plots showing taxonomic distributions within healthy and post-mortem lorikeets with enteritis. Post-mortem lorikeet microbial communities were dominated by C. perfringens
Fig. 5Susceptible CZA lorikeets have increased microbial diversity and altered microbial composition that predicts enteritis. Healthy lorikeets that never developed enteritis throughout the sampling period were identified as “True Healthy” while healthy birds that developed enteritis at least once during the sampling period were identified as “Susceptible.” “Enteritis” represents birds with enteritis that were sampled while they were clinically ill. No post-mortem samples are included in this figure. a) Microbial diversity (Observed Features, Kruskal–Wallis, all p < 0.005) was increased and b) microbial composition was altered (PERMANOVA p = 0.001) in Susceptible birds. c) Twenty-six variables including 24 microbial taxa and two demographic variables were identified in Random Forests and LASSO models as predictive of susceptibility or true health. The size of the bars represents the effect size of each variable as predicted by the RF model. (Also see Additional file 12)
Fig. 6Trypsin inhibitor measurements in commercial nectars. Trypsin inhibitor units (TIU) per milligram nectar were compared in 6 commercial nectars. Different letters above bars indicate statistically significant differences at p < 0.05 (one-way ANOVA, Tukey’s test). Bars that share the same letter do not differ significantly. (For example, Mazuri lorikeet diet and Roudybush Lory Nectar 15 share a “B” and do not differ significantly in TIU/mg.)