21 research outputs found

    Evaluation of a putative entomopathogenic Caenorhabditis (Nematoda: Rhabditid) and associated Serratia (Proteobacteria: Enterobacteriaceae)

    Get PDF
    A major goal of modern biology is to extend our understanding of biological systems investigated in the laboratory to their ecological and evolutionary context. With extensive understanding of the function, development and genetics of C. elegans, exploring the link between this laboratory model and the environment in which this system evolved would be very interesting because very little is known about the natural history of this premier model organism. A new strain of Caenorhabditis briggsae (SoAf) with an associated bacterium, Serratia sp. SCBI, has been isolated from South Africa using common entomopathogenic nematode trapping methods. This study taxonomically identified and evaluated entomopathogenic behavior of C. briggsae SoAf and Serratia sp. SCBI. Hemocoelic injections of Serratia sp. SCBI demonstrated pathogenicity in insect larvae, Galleria mellonella. Caenorhabditis briggsae SoAf and other Caenorhabditis, including C. elegans , were capable of infection, growth and reproduction within the insect larvae in the presence of Serratia sp. SCBI. Identification of a putative entomopathogenic C. briggsae expands on our understanding of Caenorhabditis ecology and provides a framework for further investigation of entomopathogensis in other free-living nematodes

    Effects of Cu/Zn Superoxide Dismutase (sod1) Genotype and Genetic Background on Growth, Reproduction and Defense in Biomphalaria glabrata

    Get PDF
    Resistance of the snail Biomphalaria glabrata to the trematode Schistosoma mansoni is correlated with allelic variation at copper-zinc superoxide dismutase (sod1). We tested whether there is a fitness cost associated with carrying the most resistant allele in three outbred laboratory populations of snails. These three populations were derived from the same base population, but differed in average resistance. Under controlled laboratory conditions we found no cost of carrying the most resistant allele in terms of fecundity, and a possible advantage in terms of growth and mortality. These results suggest that it might be possible to drive resistant alleles of sod1 into natural populations of the snail vector for the purpose of controlling transmission of S. mansoni. However, we did observe a strong effect of genetic background on the association between sod1 genotype and resistance. sod1 genotype explained substantial variance in resistance among individuals in the most resistant genetic background, but had little effect in the least resistant genetic background. Thus, epistatic interactions with other loci may be as important a consideration as costs of resistance in the use of sod1 for vector manipulation

    Bringing Research Data to the Ecology Classroom through a QUBES Faculty Mentoring Network

    Full text link
    The field of ecological research is in the midst of a data revolution. Best practices in the curation, archiving, and dissemination of data have received much attention over the past decade (e.g., Reichman et al. 2011, Whitlock 2011, Hampton et al. 2013). One result of these efforts has been a dramatic increase in open access data. Primary data associated with published manuscripts are increasingly accessible through supplementary materials, university repositories, journal-specific archives (e.g., ESA Data Registry), or public repositories (e.g., Dryad Digital Repository). Large-scale monitoring data from sensor arrays, field stations, state or federal governmental databases, and citizen science projects can be accessed on the web. Other important data streams include the digitization of biodiversity data from museum and university collections (Page et al. 2015, Holmes et al. 2016)

    Effect of genetic background and <i>sod1</i> genotype on life-history traits.

    Full text link
    <p>(A) Average size by genotypic class within each lineage at 12 weeks after egg masses were deposited. The points represent the averages of the mean size of individuals of each genotype within each of 3–4 cups (containing 13–17 F2 snails per cup). Error bars represent 1Β±SE (background 1: nβ€Š=β€Š45 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š16, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š20, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š9), background 2: nβ€Š=β€Š57 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š16, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š28, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š13) background 3: nβ€Š=β€Š58 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š16, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š28, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š14)). Snails with the <i>CC</i> genotype grew significantly more slowly than those with <i>BC</i> and <i>BB</i> genotypes. (B) Average size at 32 weeks of each genotypic class within each lineage. Means are the average of all snails within the genotypic class, and error bars represent 1Β±SE (background 1: nβ€Š=β€Š27 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š9, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š8), background 2: nβ€Š=β€Š27 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š9, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š8), background 3: nβ€Š=β€Š30 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š10)). Again, snails with the <i>CC</i> genotype grew significantly more slowly than those with <i>BC</i> and <i>BB</i> genotypes. (C) Average total egg production for five weeks per snail (each raised individually) by genotypic class within each lineage. Means are the average of all snails within the genotypic class, and error bars represent 1Β±SE (background 1: nβ€Š=β€Š25 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š9, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š9,<i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š7), background 2: nβ€Š=β€Š27 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š9, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š8), background 3: nβ€Š=β€Š30 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10,<i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š10)). (D) Mortality at 8-month census of each genotypic class within each lineage. Data points are estimates of the percent mortality in each genotypic class and error bars represent 1Β±SE on the proportion (for all backgrounds nβ€Š=β€Š30 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š10)). Snails with the <i>CC</i> genotype exhibited significantly greater mortality than those with the <i>BB</i> or <i>BC</i> genotype. (E) Mortality at 12-month census of each genotypic class within each lineage. Data points are estimates of percent mortality in each genotypic class and error bars represent 1Β±SE on the proportion (for all backgrounds nβ€Š=β€Š30 (<i>BB</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>BC</i>β€Š=β€Š10, <i>CC</i>β€Š=β€Š10)).</p

    Resistance of genetic background as a function of average resistance of grandparental inbred lines.

    Full text link
    <p>Mid-grandparent resistance was estimated by averaging the resistance of the four inbred, grandparental lines (determined previously). The resistance of each genetic background (Grand-offspring resistance) was estimated by parasite challenges done in triplicate (nβ€Š=β€Š24Γ—3) for each background (β€’ genetic background 1, β–΄ genetic background 2, and β–ͺ genetic background 3).</p
    corecore