Posts Tagged ‘Agriculture’

Antibiotic alternatives in food-producing animals

Tuesday, April 9th, 2013

Antibiotics Alternatives to antibiotics are urgently needed in animal agriculture. The form these alternatives should take presents a complex problem due to the various uses of antibiotics in animal agriculture, including disease treatment, disease prevention, and growth promotion, and to the relative contribution of these uses to the antibiotic resistance problem. Numerous antibiotic alternatives, such as pre- and probiotics, have been proposed but show variable success. This is because a fundamental understanding of how antibiotics improve feed efficiency is lacking, and because an individual alternative is unlikely to embody all of the performance-enhancing functions of antibiotics. High-throughput technologies need to be applied to better understand the problem, and informed combinations of alternatives, including vaccines, need to be considered.

This article discusses alternative approaches to animal (and therefore human) health, such as:

  • Feed additives such as pre- and probiotics
  • Phage therapy
  • Vaccines
  • Mixing additives: potentiated probiotics and synbiotics

 

Treatment, promotion, commotion: antibiotic alternatives in food-producing animals. (2013) Trends Microbiol. 21(3): 114-119. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2012.11.001

 

Schmallenberg Virus Pathogenesis and Tropism

Monday, January 14th, 2013

Approximately 30 percent of all infectious diseases that emerged between 1990 and 2000 were caused by arthropod-borne viruses (arboviruses). This is probably the result of a combination of factors including a dramatic increase in travelling and commercial exchanges, climate and ecological changes and increased livestock production. In addition, changes in trading and commercial policies have created optimal conditions for the movement of infected vertebrate hosts and invertebrate vectors over wide geographical areas.

Schmallenberg virus (SBV) was discovered in Germany (near the town of Schmallenberg) in November 2011 and since then has been found to be the cause of malformations and stillbirths in ruminants. SBV has spread very rapidly to many European countries including the United Kingdom. Very little is known about the biological properties of this virus and there is no vaccine available. In this study researchers developed an approach (called reverse genetics) that allows the recovery of “synthetic” SBV under laboratory conditions. They also developed a mouse model of infection for SBV and showed that SBV replicates in neurons of experimentally infected mice similar to naturally infected lambs and calves. Using thes tools they created SBV mutants that are not as pathogenic as the original virus due to the inability to counteract the host cell defences.This work provides important experimental tools to understand how this newly emerged virus causes disease in ruminants. In addition, it will now be possible to manipulate the SBV genome in order to develop effective vaccines.

xxx

Schmallenberg Virus Pathogenesis, Tropism and Interaction with the Innate Immune System of the Host. (2013) PLoS Pathog 9(1): e1003133. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1003133
Schmallenberg virus (SBV) is an emerging orthobunyavirus of ruminants associated with outbreaks of congenital malformations in aborted and stillborn animals. Since its discovery in November 2011, SBV has spread very rapidly to many European countries. Here, we developed molecular and serological tools, and an experimental in vivo model as a platform to study SBV pathogenesis, tropism and virus-host cell interactions. Using a synthetic biology approach, we developed a reverse genetics system for the rapid rescue and genetic manipulation of SBV. We showed that SBV has a wide tropism in cell culture and “synthetic” SBV replicates in vitro as efficiently as wild type virus. We developed an experimental mouse model to study SBV infection and showed that this virus replicates abundantly in neurons where it causes cerebral malacia and vacuolation of the cerebral cortex. These virus-induced acute lesions are useful in understanding the progression from vacuolation to porencephaly and extensive tissue destruction, often observed in aborted lambs and calves in naturally occurring Schmallenberg cases. Indeed, we detected high levels of SBV antigens in the neurons of the gray matter of brain and spinal cord of naturally affected lambs and calves, suggesting that muscular hypoplasia observed in SBV-infected lambs is mostly secondary to central nervous system damage. Finally, we investigated the molecular determinants of SBV virulence. Interestingly, we found a biological SBV clone that after passage in cell culture displays increased virulence in mice. We also found that a SBV deletion mutant of the non-structural NSs protein (SBVΔNSs) is less virulent in mice than wild type SBV. Attenuation of SBV virulence depends on the inability of SBVΔNSs to block IFN synthesis in virus infected cells. In conclusion, this work provides a useful experimental framework to study the biology and pathogenesis of SBV.

Goats cause cancer. Yes they do. Really.

Monday, May 28th, 2012

Goat Although studies have so far failed to find an infectious agent, the evidence is now pretty clear that “professional exposure to goats” increases the risk of lung cancer.

 

Professional Exposure to Goats Increases the Risk of Pneumonic-Type Lung Adenocarcinoma: Results of the IFCT-0504-Epidemio Study. (2012) PLoS ONE 7(5): e37889. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0037889
Pneumonic-type lung adenocarcinoma (P-ADC) represents a distinct subset of lung cancer with specific clinical, radiological, and pathological features. Given the weak association with tobacco-smoking and the striking similarities with jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV)-induced ovine pulmonary adenocarcinoma, it has been suggested that a zoonotic viral agent infecting pulmonary cells may predispose to P-ADC in humans. Our objective was to explore whether exposure to domestic small ruminants may represent a risk factor for P-ADC. We performed a multicenter case-control study recruiting patients with P-ADC as cases and patients with non-P-ADC non-small cell lung cancer as controls. A dedicated 356-item questionnaire was built to evaluate exposure to livestock. A total of 44 cases and 132 controls were included. At multivariate analysis, P-ADC was significantly more associated with female gender (Odds-ratio (OR) = 3.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.32–7.87, p = 0.010), never- smoker status (OR = 3.57, 95% CI: 1.27–10.00, p = 0.015), personal history of extra-thoracic cancer before P-ADC diagnosis (OR = 3.43, 95% CI: 1.10–10.72, p = 0.034), and professional exposure to goats (OR = 5.09, 95% CI: 1.05–24.69, p = 0.043), as compared to other subtypes of lung cancer. This case-control suggests a link between professional exposure to goats and P-ADC, and prompts for further epidemiological evaluation of potential environmental risk factors for P-ADC.

10 things you didn’t know about Schmallenberg virus (aka WTF is “Schmallenberg virus”?)

Wednesday, January 25th, 2012

Bunyaviruses First it was foot and mouth virus.
Then it was bluetongue virus.
Now it is Schmallenberg virus.
So here’s 10 things you didn’t know about Schmallenberg virus:

  1. Schmallenberg virus was first isolated in Schmallenberg, Germany, in November 2011.
  2. Schmallenberg virus is a Bunyavirus, one of a large group of of negative-stranded RNA viruses.
  3. Why should I care? In cows, Schmallenberg virus causes fever and a drastic reduction in milk production. In sheep it causes congenital malformations and stillborn lambs (also stillborn calves in cows).
  4. Schmallenberg virus was first identifed in the UK on 23rd January 2012.
  5. Like Bluetongue, Schmallenberg virus is transmitted by midges (Culicoides spp.), which means we will be unlikely to be able to eradicate it – vaccination of anaimals is the only likely effective response.
  6. Where did Schmallenberg virus come from? The virus genome is most closely related to sequences of a different Orthobunyavirus called Shamonda virus which belongs to the so-called Simbu serogroup known to infect ruminants and be transmitted by midges. In other words, it has form. But whether it is newly evolved (unlikely) or just newly discovered we don’t yet know.
  7. How did Schmallenberg virus reach the UK? We don’t know. It could have been due to animal movements, but since it was first identifed in eastern England, it’s possible that it arrived in midges travelling under their own steam.
  8. Is Schmallenberg virus going to spread to other parts of the UK and other countries? Yes, you can bet on that (just like bluetongue did).
  9. Can I catch Schmallenberg virus? Honest answer: We don’t know. Possibly, but there have been no reports of human illness from areas where the virus is known to exist, so I wouldn’t worry too much.
  10. Where can I find the latest news about Schmallenberg virus? Right here.
  11. OK, one last time, why should I care? Because Schmallenberg virus is going to cost European and probably worldwide ecomonies millions of pounds. And that will affect you.

Top 10 of Top 10′s ?

Thursday, January 12th, 2012

TMV I recently wrote about the top 10 plant viruses in molecular plant pathology. Well Ed didn’t like that list, so he’s published his own:

  1. Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV)
  2. Tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV)
  3. Tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV)
  4. Cucumber mosaic virus (CMV)
  5. Potato virus Y (PVY)
  6. Cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV)
  7. African cassava mosaic virus (ACMV)
  8. Plum pox virus (PPV)
  9. Brome mosaic virus (BMV)
  10. Potato virus X (PVX)

“I see only ONE virus in the major list – African cassava mosaic begomovirus (ACMV) – that infects and causes severe losses in one of the four major food crops grown on this planet: all the rest, excepting viruses infecting the also-ran potato, are pathogens of fruits, vegetables or horticulturally-important plants. Or hardly pathogenic at all, as in the case of BMV – and before anyone argues, I probably have the best collection of African (and other) isolates of the virus in the world, and a lot of experience of it in the field.”

I have a feeling this could go on for some time :-)

Top 10 plant viruses in molecular plant pathology

Wednesday, January 4th, 2012

TMV Many scientists, if not all, feel that their particular plant virus should appear in any list of the most important plant viruses. However, to our knowledge, no such list exists. The aim of this review was to survey all plant virologists with an association with Molecular Plant Pathology and ask them to nominate which plant viruses they would place in a ‘Top 10′ based on scientific/economic importance. The survey generated more than 250 votes from the international community, and allowed the generation of a Top 10 plant virus list including, in rank order:

  • Tobacco mosaic virus
  • Tomato spotted wilt virus
  • Tomato yellow leaf curl virus
  • Cucumber mosaic virus
  • Potato virus Y
  • Cauliflower mosaic virus
  • African cassava mosaic virus
  • Plum pox virus
  • Brome mosaic virus
  • Potato virus X

This review article presents a short review on each virus of the Top 10 list and its importance, with the intent of initiating discussion and debate amongst the plant virology community, as well as laying down a benchmark, as it will be interesting to see in future years how perceptions change and which viruses enter and leave the Top 10.

Top 10 plant viruses in molecular plant pathology. (2011) Mol Plant Pathol. 12(9): 938-954. doi: 10.1111/j.1364-3703.2011.00752.x


Four new viruses of honey bees

Monday, June 13th, 2011

Nosema spores There are numerous threats facing honey bee populations and the recent losses of honey bee colonies in the United States, Canada, and Europe is alarming. In the U.S., annual honey bee colony losses increased from 17–20% to 32% during the winter of 2006/07 with some operations losing 90% of their hives. Average annual losses have remained high, averaging 32% from 2007–2010. One factor contributing to increased losses is Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), an unexplained loss of honey bee colonies fitting a defined set of criteria. While factors such as pesticide exposure, transportation stress, genetic diversity, and nutrition affect colony health, the most significant CCD-associated variable characterized to date is increased pathogen incidence. Although greater pathogen incidence correlates with CCD, the cause is unknown in part due to insufficient knowledge of the pathogenic and commensal organisms associated with honey bees.

To gain a more complete understanding of the spectrum of infectious agents and potential threats found in commercially managed migratory honey bee colonies, researchers conducted a 10-month investigation. Analysis incorporated a suite of molecular tools (custom microarray, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative PCR (qPCR) and deep sequencing) enabling rapid detection of the presence (or absence) of all previously identified honey bee pathogens as well as facilitating the detection of novel pathogens. This study provides a comprehensive temporal characterization of honey bee pathogens and offers a baseline for understanding current and emerging threats to this critical component of U.S. agriculture.

Discovery and characterization of four new viruses will facilitate future monitoring of bee colones. Temporal characterization of these and other microbes offers a more complete view of the possible microbe-microbe and microbe-environment interactions. Further studies examining any subtle or combinatorial effects of these novel microbes are required to understand their role in colony health.

 

Temporal Analysis of the Honey Bee Microbiome Reveals Four Novel Viruses and Seasonal Prevalence of Known Viruses, Nosema, and Crithidia. (2011) PLoS ONE 6(6): e20656. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020656
Honey bees (Apis mellifera) play a critical role in global food production as pollinators of numerous crops. Recently, honey bee populations in the United States, Canada, and Europe have suffered an unexplained increase in annual losses due to a phenomenon known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). Epidemiological analysis of CCD is confounded by a relative dearth of bee pathogen field studies. To identify what constitutes an abnormal pathophysiological condition in a honey bee colony, it is critical to have characterized the spectrum of exogenous infectious agents in healthy hives over time. We conducted a prospective study of a large scale migratory bee keeping operation using high-frequency sampling paired with comprehensive molecular detection methods, including a custom microarray, qPCR, and ultra deep sequencing. We established seasonal incidence and abundance of known viruses, Nosema sp., Crithidia mellificae, and bacteria. Ultra deep sequence analysis further identified four novel RNA viruses, two of which were the most abundant observed components of the honey bee microbiome (~10^11 viruses per honey bee). Our results demonstrate episodic viral incidence and distinct pathogen patterns between summer and winter time-points. Peak infection of common honey bee viruses and Nosema occurred in the summer, whereas levels of the trypanosomatid Crithidia mellificae and Lake Sinai virus 2, a novel virus, peaked in January.

Fungus as a Biological Control for an Important Vector of Livestock Disease

Friday, May 13th, 2011

Culicoides Culicoides biting midges are widely distributed throughout the world and are vectors of internationally important livestock viruses, including bluetongue virus (BTV), African horse sickness virus (AHSV), Akabane virus and Epizootic haemorrhagic disease virus (EHDV). Bluetongue disease (BT) has gained considerable notoriety in recent years because of an unprecedented globalisation and climate change-mediated expansion of its range in Europe, resulting in BTV reaching areas with no historical record of the disease. The economic impact of outbreaks of BTV in these areas has been considerable as a result of both indirect costs (e.g. the restrictions placed on movement of infected ruminants) and direct losses from disease in both sheep and cattle. In addition, whilst vaccination campaigns across northern Europe eventually controlled outbreaks in this region,  it took approximately eighteen months from the initial incursion in 2006 to the deployment of vaccine in the field. During this lag period, attempts to control the spread of BTV were limited to the restriction of animal movement and the application of methods to control Culicoides midges (primarily through the use of pour-on pyrethroid insecticides to vulnerable stocks).

BTV is an arbovirus and therefore depends almost entirely on the occurrence of farm-associated populations of competent Culicoides biting midges for transmission to its ruminant hosts. As a period of extrinsic replication is required within these vectors, control measures directed at adults have the potential to reduce the spread of midge-transmitted diseases through shortening or interrupting their lifespan. Indeed, epidemiological transmission models of vector-borne diseases show that the adult lifespan is the single most important factor affecting risk of transmission. At present, the majority of approaches to control populations of biting midges are based upon the application of insecticides (primarily synthetic pyrethroids) which in northern Europe are most commonly applied to livestock, although systematic testing of compounds to date has demonstrated equivocal results. Wide scale larvicidal or adulticidal use of these compounds against Culicoides has not been considered sustainable because of the paucity of knowledge surrounding larval habitats and adult resting places, combined with increasing restrictions within the EU on untargeted use of pyrethroid insecticides. An alternative insecticide, Ivermectin, is effective in killing Culicoides species when applied intradermally or subcutaneously and also toxic to midge larvae when excreted in faeces (a potential breeding site) but has also been shown to be harmful to beneficial insects such as dung beetles. Farmers are therefore caught between the need to control populations of biting midges and the diminishing number of chemical insecticides as they are withdrawn because of their perceived risk to humans and the environment.

Entomopathogenic Fungus as a Biological Control for an Important Vector of Livestock Disease: The Culicoides Biting Midge. 2011 PLoS ONE 6(1): e16108. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016108
The recent outbreak of bluetongue virus in northern Europe has led to an urgent need to identify control measures for the Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) biting midges that transmit it. Following successful use of the entomopathogenic fungus Metarhizium anisopliae against larval stages of biting midge Culicoides nubeculosus Meigen, we investigated the efficacy of this strain and other fungi (Beauveria bassiana, Isaria fumosorosea and Lecanicillium longisporum) as biocontrol agents against adult C. nubeculosus in laboratory and greenhouse studies.
Exposure of midges to ‘dry’ conidia of all fungal isolates caused significant reductions in survival compared to untreated controls. Metarhizium anisopliae strain V275 was the most virulent, causing a significantly decrease in midge survival compared to all other fungal strains tested. The LT50 value for strain V275 was 1.42 days compared to 2.21–3.22 days for the other isolates. The virulence of this strain was then further evaluated by exposing C. nubeculosus to varying doses (108–1011 conidia m−2) using different substrates (horse manure, damp peat, leaf litter) as a resting site. All exposed adults were found to be infected with the strain V275 four days after exposure. A further study exposed C. nubeculosus adults to ‘dry’ conidia and ‘wet’ conidia (conidia suspended in 0.03% aq. Tween 80) of strain V275 applied to damp peat and leaf litter in cages within a greenhouse. ‘Dry’ conidia were more effective than ‘wet’ conidia, causing 100% mortality after 5 days.
This is the first study to demonstrate that entomopathogenic fungi are potential biocontrol agents against adult Culicoides, through the application of ‘dry’ conidia on surfaces (e.g., manure, leaf litter, livestock) where the midges tend to rest. Subsequent conidial transmission between males and females may cause an increased level of fungi-induced mortality in midges thus reducing the incidence of disease.

Still blaming the badgers?

Monday, April 4th, 2011

Save our badgers I’m trying to persuade a student to do my final year project next year on badger culling and bovine tuberculosis:

Bovine tuberculosis (bTB) remains an important public health concern worldwide as a result of deficiencies in preventing and/or controlling measures targeting the spread of its causative agent Mycobacterium bovis. While the risk posed by M. bovis to human health is low in most developed countries, the main causes of concern related to M. bovis in industrialized countries are epizootics in domesticated and wild mammal populations. Infection with M. bovis remains a significant livestock zoonosis in the European Union where some member states experience a reemergence of the disease despite significant historical efforts to implement eradication plans. In Great Britain, the disease was eliminated from most cattle herds by 1960, with the exception of infection hotspots in southwest England, after the implementation of a herd testing and slaughter policy. However, efforts to completely eradicate bTB in Great Britain have been hampered by the maintenance of M. bovis in wildlife host populations, acting as reservoirs of infection, in particular badgers (Meles meles). Since 1979, incidence in British cattle has increased and the infection has become more geographically widespread. Over 7 million cattle were tested for bovine bTB in 2009 and one in ten herds experienced bTB-related movement restrictions during the year as a result of at least one member of the herd failing the tuberculin skin test or showing lesions consistent with bTB during the slaughterhouse inspection – an event known as a “herd breakdown”.

Local Cattle and Badger Populations Affect the Risk of Confirmed Tuberculosis in British Cattle Herds. 2011 PLoS ONE 6(3): e18058. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018058
Background: The control of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) remains a priority on the public health agenda in Great Britain, after launching in 1998 the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of badger (Meles meles) culling as a control strategy. Our study complements previous analyses of the RBCT data (focusing on treatment effects) by presenting analyses of herd-level risks factors associated with the probability of a confirmed bTB breakdown in herds within each treatment: repeated widespread proactive culling, localized reactive culling and no culling (survey-only).
Methodology/Principal Findings: New cases of bTB breakdowns were monitored inside the RBCT areas from the end of the first proactive badger cull to one year after the last proactive cull. The risk of a herd bTB breakdown was modeled using logistic regression and proportional hazard models adjusting for local farm-level risk factors. Inside survey-only and reactive areas, increased numbers of active badger setts and cattle herds within 1500 m of a farm were associated with an increased bTB risk. Inside proactive areas, the number of M. bovis positive badgers initially culled within 1500 m of a farm was the strongest predictor of the risk of a confirmed bTB breakdown.
Conclusions/Significance: The use of herd-based models provide insights into how local cattle and badger populations affect the bTB breakdown risks of individual cattle herds in the absence of and in the presence of badger culling. These measures of local bTB risks could be integrated into a risk-based herd testing programme to improve the targeting of interventions aimed at reducing the risks of bTB transmission.

Related: