Browsing by Author "Parekh, Fenali"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Chemical Stimulants and Stressors Impact the Outcome of Virus Infection and Immune Gene Expression in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera)(Frontiers Media SA, 2021-10) Parekh, Fenali; Daughenbaugh, Katie F.; Flenniken, Michelle L.Western honey bees (Apis mellifera) are ecologically, agriculturally, and economically important plant pollinators. High average annual losses of honey bee colonies in the US have been partially attributed to agrochemical exposure and virus infections. To examine the potential negative synergistic impacts of agrochemical exposure and virus infection, as well as the potential promise of phytochemicals to ameliorate the impact of pathogenic infections on honey bees, we infected bees with a panel of viruses (i.e., Flock House virus, deformed wing virus, or Sindbis virus) and exposed to one of three chemical compounds. Specifically, honey bees were fed sucrose syrup containing: (1) thyme oil, a phytochemical and putative immune stimulant, (2) fumagillin, a beekeeper applied fungicide, or (3) clothianidin, a grower-applied insecticide. We determined that virus abundance was lower in honey bees fed 0.16 ppb thyme oil augmented sucrose syrup, compared to bees fed sucrose syrup alone. Parallel analysis of honey bee gene expression revealed that honey bees fed thyme oil augmented sucrose syrup had higher expression of key RNAi genes (argonaute-2 and dicer-like), antimicrobial peptide expressing genes (abaecin and hymenoptaecin), and vitellogenin, a putative honey bee health and age indicator, compared to bees fed only sucrose syrup. Virus abundance was higher in bees fed fumagillin (25 ppm or 75 ppm) or 1 ppb clothianidin containing sucrose syrup relative to levels in bees fed only sucrose syrup. Whereas, honey bees fed 10 ppb clothianidin had lower virus levels, likely because consuming a near lethal dose of insecticide made them poor hosts for virus infection. The negative impact of fumagillin and clothianidin on honey bee health was indicated by the lower expression of argonaute-2, dicer-like, abaecin, and hymenoptaecin, and vitellogenin. Together, these results indicate that chemical stimulants and stressors impact the outcome of virus infection and immune gene expression in honey bees.Item Honey Bee and Bumble Bee Antiviral Defense(2018-08) McMenamin, Alexander J.; Daughenbaugh, Katie F.; Parekh, Fenali; Pizzorno, Marie C.; Flenniken, Michelle L.Bees are important plant pollinators in both natural and agricultural ecosystems. Managed and wild bees have experienced high average annual colony losses, population declines, and local extinctions in many geographic regions. Multiple factors, including virus infections, impact bee health and longevity. The majority of bee-infecting viruses are positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses. Bee-infecting viruses often cause asymptomatic infections but may also cause paralysis, deformity or death. The severity of infection is governed by bee host immune responses and influenced by additional biotic and abiotic factors. Herein, we highlight studies that have contributed to the current understanding of antiviral defense in bees, including the Western honey bee (Apis mellifera), the Eastern honey bee (Apis cerana) and bumble bee species (Bombus spp.). Bee antiviral defense mechanisms include RNA interference (RNAi), endocytosis, melanization, encapsulation, autophagy and conserved immune pathways including Jak/STAT (Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription), JNK (c-Jun N-terminal kinase), MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinases) and the NF-κB mediated Toll and Imd (immune deficiency) pathways. Studies in Dipteran insects, including the model organism Drosophila melanogaster and pathogen-transmitting mosquitos, provide the framework for understanding bee antiviral defense. However, there are notable differences such as the more prominent role of a non-sequence specific, dsRNA-triggered, virus limiting response in honey bees and bumble bees. This virus-limiting response in bees is akin to pathways in a range of organisms including other invertebrates (i.e., oysters, shrimp and sand flies), as well as the mammalian interferon response. Current and future research aimed at elucidating bee antiviral defense mechanisms may lead to development of strategies that mitigate bee losses, while expanding our understanding of insect antiviral defense and the potential evolutionary relationship between sociality and immune function.Item Investigating Virus–Host Interactions in Cultured Primary Honey Bee Cells(MDPI AG, 2021-07) McMenamin, Alexander J.; Parekh, Fenali; Lawrence, Verena; Flenniken, Michelle L.Honey bee (Apis mellifera) health is impacted by viral infections at the colony, individual bee, and cellular levels. To investigate honey bee antiviral defense mechanisms at the cellular level we further developed the use of cultured primary cells, derived from either larvae or pupae, and demonstrated that these cells could be infected with a panel of viruses, including common honey bee infecting viruses (i.e., sacbrood virus (SBV) and deformed wing virus (DWV)) and an insect model virus, Flock House virus (FHV). Virus abundances were quantified over the course of infection. The production of infectious virions in cultured honey bee pupal cells was demonstrated by determining that naïve cells became infected after the transfer of deformed wing virus or Flock House virus from infected cell cultures. Initial characterization of the honey bee antiviral immune responses at the cellular level indicated that there were virus-specific responses, which included increased expression of bee antiviral protein-1 (GenBank: MF116383) in SBV-infected pupal cells and increased expression of argonaute-2 and dicer-like in FHV-infected hemocytes and pupal cells. Additional studies are required to further elucidate virus-specific honey bee antiviral defense mechanisms. The continued use of cultured primary honey bee cells for studies that involve multiple viruses will address this knowledge gap.