| Literature DB >> 35902980 |
H Pieter J van Veelen1,2, Joana Falcão Salles3, Kevin D Matson4, G Sander van Doorn3, Marco van der Velde3, B Irene Tieleman3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In a diverse microbial world immune function of animals is essential. Diverse microbial environments may contribute to extensive variation in immunological phenotypes of vertebrates, among and within species and individuals. As maternal effects benefit offspring development and survival, whether females use cues about their microbial environment to prime offspring immune function is unclear. To provide microbial environmental context to maternal effects, we asked if the bacterial diversity of the living environment of female zebra finches Taeniopygia guttata shapes maternal effects on egg immune function. We manipulated environmental bacterial diversity of birds and tested if females increased immunological investment in eggs in an environment with high bacterial diversity (untreated soil) versus low (gamma-sterilized soil). We quantified lysozyme and ovotransferrin in egg albumen and IgY in egg yolk and in female blood, and we used 16S rRNA gene sequencing to profile maternal cloacal and eggshell microbiotas.Entities:
Keywords: Bird microbiota; Host–microbial interactions; Immune function; Maternal effect; Microbial environment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35902980 PMCID: PMC9331593 DOI: 10.1186/s42523-022-00195-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anim Microbiome ISSN: 2524-4671
Fig. 1Conceptual model describing potential microbial environment effects on maternal immunological priming of avian eggs [9, 13–15, 27–36]
Fig. 2Experimental microbial environmental effects on egg immune function. A Lysozyme concentration (mg ml−1; log scale), B Ovotransferrin concentration (mg ml−1), C IgY concentration in yolk (OD405nm), and D the first two principal coordinate axes of a multivariate immune index that represents the variation of the indices presented in A–C. Individual egg samples are presented by laying sequence (color) and stratified by clutch number (shape in A–C) or treatment (shape in D). None of the egg immune indices were significantly different between the two experimental microbial environments (Table 1)
Analysis of variance of egg immune function indices
| Response | Fixed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Albumen lysozyme log-scale (mg ml−1) | Experimental treatment | 1, 33 | 0.01 | 0.908 |
| Clutch number | 1, 116 | 4.90 | ||
| Egg sequence | 1, 128 | 0.14 | 0.709 | |
| pH | 1, 122 | 0.62 | 0.432 |
Bold values denote significant effects (alpha = 0.05)
aDenominator degrees of freedom based on Satterthwaite approximation
bDistance-based Redundancy Analysis based on a Bray–Curtis dissimilarity matrix of three immune indices
cMarginal effects estimated with permutations stratified by female identity
Adjusted repeatabilities of egg innate immune function for individual female zebra finches
| Immune index | SE | 95% CI (lower, upper) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Albumen lysozyme | |||||
| log-scale (mg ml−1) | 0.268 | 0.095 | 0.073, 0.442 | ||
| Albumen ovotransferrin (mg ml−1) | 0 | 0.052 | 0, 0.17 | 1.000 | |
| Yolk IgY concentration (OD405nm) | 0.804 | 0.113 | 0.503, 0.923 | ||
| Multivariate immune index | High diversity PCo 1 | 0.214 | 0.2 | 0, 0.568 | 0.131 |
| High diversity PCo 2 | 0.406 | 0.18 | 0, 0.701 | ||
| Low diversity PCo 1 | 0 | 0.068 | 0, 0.236 | 1.000 | |
| Low diversity PCo 2 | 0.277 | 0.141 | 0, 0.549 |
Bold values denote significant effects (alpha = 0.05)
Fig. 3Experimental effect on the relationship between maternal and egg yolk IgY concentrations. A Elevated maternal IgY concentration in a high diversity microbial environment. B Egg IgY concentration increases with maternal IgY concentration only in the high diversity microbial environment. Lines depict linear mixed model predictions (± 95% CI)
Fig. 4PLS-PM predictions link environmental and maternal microbiota to egg immune function. PLS-PM structural model representations. (A, B) depict predicted path coefficients that were extracted from the global model for experimental microbial environments with A High diversity and B Low diversity. C The experimental treatment effect on path coefficients was assessed with a bootstrap procedure and a t-test, where effects with FDR q < 0.1 were considered significant. A, B Dark grey ellipses depict (uni- or multivariate) latent variables and light grey rectangles represent manifest variables of either reflective or formative indicators of the latent variables. Colored arrows represent the path predictions (blue = positive; red = negative), line weight is proportional to the effect size (arrow labels); asterisks denote the probability that path coefficient is not zero: * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001, **** P < 0.0001