Illthrift in Suckling Lambs Secondary to Umbilical Infections and Possible Implication of Cryptosporidiosis as a Risk Factor

Illthrift was observed in 20/60 lambs aged 40–45 days in a dairy sheep flock in Greece. Cryptosporidiosis had been diagnosed and successfully treated with halofuginone lactate a month earlier. Parasitological examinations were negative for endoparasites while hematology and biochemistry were unremarkable. Necropsy of 5 lambs revealed lung and liver abscessation, presumably secondary to umbilical infections due to poor farm hygiene, though umbilical lesions were not observed. No new cases were observed following treatment of the umbilicus of newborn lambs with chlorexidine. Although umbilical infections are common, this is the first reported case of illthrift in lambs attributed to umbilical infection; illthrift may be the only clinical manifestation of such infections. The prior presence of cryptosporidiosis may have contributed to the severity of the infection through the reduction of local immunity. Recognition of this possibly underdiagnosed or underappreciated condition may improve medical, production, and welfare standards in the sheep industry

Gut bacteriome analysis of Anastrepha fraterculus sp. 1 during the early steps of laboratory colonization

Microbial communities associated to insect species are involved in essential biological functions such as host nutrition, reproduction and survivability. Main factors have been described as modulators of gut bacterial community, such as diet, habit, developmental stage and taxonomy of the host. The present work focuses on the complex changes that gut microbial communities go through when wild insects are introduced to artificial rearing conditions. Specifically, we analyzed the effect of the laboratory colonization on the richness and diversity of the gut bacteriome hosted by the fruit fly pest Anastrepha fraterculus sp. 1. Bacterial profiles were studied by amplicon sequencing of the 16S rRNA V3–V4 hypervariable region in gut samples of males and females, in teneral (1-day-old, unfed) and post-teneral (15-day-old, fed) flies. A total of 3,147,665 sequence reads were obtained and 32 bacterial operational taxonomic units (OTUs) were identified. Proteobacteria was the most abundant phylum (93.3% of the total reads) and, Wolbachia and Enterobacter were the most represented taxa at the genus level (29.9% and 27.7%, respectively, of the total read counts). Wild and laboratory flies showed highly significant differences in the relative abundances of bacteria. The analysis of the core bacteriome showed the presence of five OTUs in all samples grouped by origin, while nine and five OTUs were exclusively detected in laboratory and wild flies, respectively. Irrespective of fly origin or sex, a dominant presence of Wolbachia was observed in teneral flies, whereas Enterobacter was highly abundant in post-teneral individuals. We evidenced significant differences in bacterial richness and diversity among generations under laboratory colonization (F0, F1, F3 and F6) and compared to laboratory and wild flies, displaying also differential patterns between teneral and post-teneral flies. Laboratory and wild A. fraterculus sp. 1 harbor different gut bacterial communities. Laboratory colonization has an important effect on the microbiota, most likely associated to the combined effects of insect physiology and environmental conditions (e.g., diet and colony management).Instituto de GenéticaFil: Salgueiro, Julieta. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Pimper, Lidia Elena. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Milla, Fabian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Russo, Romina María. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Asimakis, Elias D. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Stathopoulou, Panagiota. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Bourtzis, Kostas. Vienna International Centre. Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture. Insect Pest Control Laboratory; AustriaFil: Cladera, Jorge Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Tsiamis, George. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Lanzavecchia, Silvia Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética "Ewald A. Favret". Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin

Wolbachia pipientis associated with tephritid fruit fly pests: from basic research to applications

Members of the true fruit flies (family Tephritidae) are among the most serious agricultural pests worldwide, whose control and management demands large and costly international efforts. The need for cost-effective and environmentally friendly integrated pest management (IPM) has led to the development and implementation of autocidal control strategies. These approaches include the widely used sterile insect technique and the incompatible insect technique (IIT). IIT relies on maternally transmitted bacteria (namely Wolbachia) to cause a conditional sterility in crosses between released mass-reared Wolbachia-infected males and wild females, which are either uninfected or infected with a different Wolbachia strain (i.e., cytoplasmic incompatibility; CI). Herein, we review the current state of knowledge on Wolbachia-tephritid interactions including infection prevalence in wild populations, phenotypic consequences, and their impact on life history traits. Numerous pest tephritid species are reported to harbor Wolbachia infections, with a subset exhibiting high prevalence. The phenotypic effects of Wolbachia have been assessed in very few tephritid species, due in part to the difficulty of manipulating Wolbachia infection (removal or transinfection). Based on recent methodological advances (high-throughput DNA sequencing) and breakthroughs concerning the mechanistic basis of CI, we suggest research avenues that could accelerate generation of necessary knowledge for the potential use of Wolbachia-based IIT in area-wide integrated pest management (AW-IPM) strategies for the population control of tephritid pests.Instituto de GenéticaFil: Mateos, Mariana. Texas A&M University. Departments of Ecology and Conservation Biology, and Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences; Estados UnidosFil: Martinez Montoya, Humberto. Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas. Unidad Académica Multidisciplinaria Reynosa Aztlan. Laboratorio de Genética y Genómica Comparativa; MéxicoFil: Lanzavecchia, Silvia Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética; ArgentinaFil: Conte, Claudia Alejandra. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética; ArgentinaFil: Guillén, Karina. El Colegio de la Frontera Sur; MéxicoFil: Morán-Aceves, Brenda M. El Colegio de la Frontera Sur; MéxicoFil: Toledo, Jorge. El Colegio de la Frontera Sur; MéxicoFil: Liedo, Pablo. El Colegio de la Frontera Sur; MéxicoFil: Asimakis, Elias D. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Doudoumis, Vangelis. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Kyritsis, Georgios A. University of Thessaly. Department of Agriculture Crop Production and Rural Environment. Laboratory of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology; GreciaFil: Papadopoulos, Nikos T. University of Thessaly. Department of Agriculture Crop Production and Rural Environment. Laboratory of Entomology and Agricultural Zoology; GreciaFil: Augustinos, Antonios A. Hellenic Agricultural Organization. Institute of Industrial and Forage Crops. Department of Plant Protection; GreciaFil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Tsiamis, George. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; Greci

Ovine and Caprine Toxoplasmosis: Experimental Study

Eighteen mature ewes of the Mytilene breed and 18 mature Local- Damascus crossbred goats, seronegative for Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) by ELISA were used. All animals were mated after synchronization of estrus. On day 90 of pregnancy, animals were randomly assigned to 3 experimental groups; 6 ewes (S1) and 6 goats (G1) were orally inoculated by stomach tube with 1000 oocysts; 6 ewes (S2) and 6 goats (G2) were orally inoculated with a non-infected control inoculum. On day 140+2 of pregnancy, the remaining 6 ewes (S3) and 6 goats (G3) were inoculated by stomach tube with 3000 oocysts. Positive T. godii DNA was detected in 94% of fetal and maternal blood, 95% fetal tissue, 89% pre-colostral udder secretions and 12.5% milk samples using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). Infected animals and their live newborns was seropositive (ELISA) until the end of the study. PCR was able to detect T. gondii DNA in maternal blood of infected animals 3-5 days before abortion occurred. This time period may be used to implement preventive and therapeutic measure to reduce abortion rate and associated economic losses. Since milk and milk products are important food sources in rural areas and in many cases it is used unpasteurized before consumption. The T. gondii DNA, detected by PCR in milk samples of infected animals, increases the possibility that the parasite is transmitted through consumption of unpasteurized milk which is a highly relevant result for public health considerations and providing valuable information for future research

Analysis of the gut bacterial community of wild larvae of Anastrepha fraterculus sp. 1: effect of host fruit, environment, and prominent stable associations of the genera Wolbachia, Tatumella, and Enterobacter

The genus Anastrepha (Diptera Tephritidae) includes some of the most important fruit fly pests in the Americas. Here, we studied the gut bacterial community of 3rd instar larvae of Anastrepha fraterculus sp. 1 through Next Generation Sequencing (lllumina) of the V3-V4 hypervariable region within the 16S rRNA gene. Gut bacterial communities were compared between host species (guava and peach), and geographical origins (Concordia and Horco Molle in Argentina) representing distinct ecological scenarios. In addition, we explored the effect of spatial scale by comparing the samples collected from different trees within each geographic origin and host species. We also addressed the effect of fruit size on bacterial diversity. The gut bacterial community was affected both by host species and geographic origin. At smaller spatial scales, the gut bacterial profile differed among trees of the same species and location at least in one host-location combination. There was no effect of fruit size on the larval gut bacteriome. Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs) assigned to Wolbachia, Tatumella and Enterobacter were identified in all samples examined, which suggest potential, non transient symbioses. Better knowledge on the larval gut bacteriome contributes valuable information to develop sustainable control strategies against A. fraterculus targeting key symbionts as the Achilles’ heel to control this important fruit fly pest.Instituto de GenéticaFil: Salgueiro, Julieta. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; ArgentinaFil: Salgueiro, Julieta. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Salgueiro, Julieta. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Nussenbaum, Ana Laura. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Nussenbaum, Ana Laura. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Milla, Fabian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; ArgentinaFil: Milla, Fabian Horacio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Asimakis, Elias D. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Goane, Lucía. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Goane, Lucía. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia; ArgentinaFil: Ruiz, María Josefina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Ruiz, María Josefina. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia; ArgentinaFil: Bachmann, Guillermo Enrique. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; ArgentinaFil: Bachmann, Guillermo Enrique. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Bachmann, Guillermo Enrique. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Vera, María Teresa. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Vera, María Teresa. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia; ArgentinaFil: Stathopoulou, Panagiota. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Bourtzis, Kostas. Vienna International Centre. Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture. Insect Pest Control Laboratory; AustriaFil: Deutscher, Ania T. Biosecurity and Food Safety. Department of Primary Industries, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute (EMAI); AustraliaFil: Lanzavecchia, Silvia Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; ArgentinaFil: Lanzavecchia, Silvia Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Tsiamis, George. University of Patras. Department of Environmental Engineering; GreciaFil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; ArgentinaFil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin