Tiphanie Goetstouwers

Differentiation of F4 receptor profiles in pigs based on their mucin 4 polymorphism, responsiveness to oral F4 immunization and in vitro binding of F4 to villi

F4(+) enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (F4(+) ETEC) are an important cause of diarrhoea and mortality in piglets. F4(+) ETEC use their F4 fimbriae to adhere to specific receptors (F4Rs) on small intestinal brush borders, resulting in colonization of the small intestine. To prevent pigs from post-weaning diarrhoea, pigs should be vaccinated during the suckling period. Previously, we demonstrated that F4acR(+), but not F4acR(-) piglets could be orally immunized with purified F4 fimbriae resulting in a protective immunity against F4(+) ETEC infections, indicating that this immune response was F4R dependent. Recently, aminopeptidase N has been identified as a glycoprotein receptor important for this oral immune response. However, in some oral immunization experiments, a few F4acR(+) piglets did not show an antibody response upon oral immunization, suggesting additional receptors. Therefore, the binding profile of F4 to brush border membrane (glyco)proteins was determined for pigs differing in F4-specific antibody response upon oral immunization, in in vitro adhesion of F4(+)E. coli to small intestinal villi, and in Muc4 genotype. Six groups of pigs could be identified. Only two groups positive in all three assays showed two high molecular weight (MW) glycoprotein bands (>250kDa) suggesting that these high MW bands are linked to the MUC4 susceptible genotype. The fact that these bands were absent in the MUC4 resistant group which showed a positive immune response against F4 and was positive in the adhesion test confirm that at least one or perhaps more other F4Rs exist. Interestingly, two pigs that were positive in the villous adhesion assay did not show an immune response against F4 fimbriae. This suggests that a third receptor category might exist which allows the bacteria to adhere but does not allow effective immunization with soluble F4 fimbriae. Future research will be necessary to confirm or reveal the identity of these receptors.

Refined candidate region for F4ab/ac enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli susceptibility situated proximal to MUC13 in pigs

F4 enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (F4 ETEC) are an important cause of diarrhea in neonatal and newly-weaned pigs. Based on the predicted differential O-glycosylation patterns of the 2 MUC13 variants (MUC13A and MUC13B) in F4ac ETEC susceptible and F4ac ETEC resistant pigs, the MUC13 gene was recently proposed as the causal gene for F4ac ETEC susceptibility. Because the absence of MUC13 on Western blot from brush border membrane vesicles of F4ab/acR+ pigs and the absence of F4ac attachment to immunoprecipitated MUC13 could not support this hypothesis, a new GWAS study was performed using 52 non-adhesive and 68 strong adhesive pigs for F4ab/ac ETEC originating from 5 Belgian farms. A refined candidate region (chr13: 144,810,100–144,993,222) for F4ab/ac ETEC susceptibility was identified with MUC13 adjacent to the distal part of the region. This candidate region lacks annotated genes and contains a sequence gap based on the sequence of the porcine GenomeBuild 10.2. We hypothesize that a porcine orphan gene or trans-acting element present in the identified candidate region has an effect on the glycosylation of F4 binding proteins and therefore determines the F4ab/ac ETEC susceptibility in pigs.

Maternal immunity enhances systemic recall immune responses upon oral immunization of piglets with F4 fimbriae

F4 enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) cause diarrhoea and mortality in piglets leading to severe economic losses. Oral immunization of piglets with F4 fimbriae induces a protective intestinal immune response evidenced by an F4-specific serum and intestinal IgA response. However, successful oral immunization of pigs with F4 fimbriae in the presence of maternal immunity has not been demonstrated yet. In the present study we aimed to evaluate the effect of maternal immunity on the induction of a systemic immune response upon oral immunization of piglets. Whereas F4-specific IgG and IgA could be induced by oral immunization of pigs without maternal antibodies and by intramuscular immunization of pigs with maternal antibodies, no such response was seen in the orally immunized animals with maternal antibodies. Since maternal antibodies can mask an antibody response, we also looked by ELIspot assays for circulating F4-specific antibody secreting cells (ASCs). Enumerating the F4-specific ASCs within the circulating peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and the number of F4-specific IgA ASCs within the circulating IgA+ B-cells revealed an F4-specific immune response in the orally immunized animals with maternal antibodies. Interestingly, results suggest a more robust IgA booster response by oral immunization of pigs with than without maternal antibodies. These results demonstrate that oral immunization of piglets with F4-specific maternal antibodies is feasible and that these maternal antibodies seem to enhance the secondary systemic immune response. Furthermore, our ELIspot assay on enriched IgA+ B-cells could be used as a screening procedure to optimize mucosal immunization protocols in pigs with maternal immunity.

High susceptibility prevalence for F4(+) and F18(+)Escherichia coli in Flemish pigs.

F4 and/or F18 enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (F4+/F18+ ETEC) are responsible for diarrhea while F18+ verotoxigenic E. coli (F18+ VTEC) cause edema disease in pigs. Both infections can result in severe economic losses, which are mainly the result of the medication, growth retardation and mortality. The susceptibility of piglets to these pathogens is determined by the presence of F4 and F18 receptors (F4R and F18R). Understanding the composition of the susceptibility phenotypes of pigs is useful for animal health and breeding management. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of the F4 ETEC susceptibility phenotypes and F18+E. coli susceptibility among Flemish pig breeds by using the in vitro villous adhesion assay. In this study, seven F4 ETEC susceptibility phenotypes were found, namely A (F4abR+,acR+,adR+; 59.16%), B (F4abR+,acR+,adR-; 6.28%), C (F4abR+,acR-,adR+; 2.62%), D (F4abR-,acR-,adR+; 6.28%), E (F4abR-,acR-,adR-; 24.08%), F (F4abR+,acR-,adR-; 1.05%) and G (F4abR-,acR+,adR-; 0.52%). F4ab and F4ac E. coli showed a stronger degree of adhesion to the intestinal villi (53.40% and 52.88% strong adhesion, respectively), compared to F4ad E. coli (43.46% strong adhesion). Furthermore, the correlation between F4ac and F4ab adhesion was higher (r=0.78) than between F4ac and F4ad adhesion (r=0.41) and between F4ab and F4ad adhesion (r=0.57). For F18+E. coli susceptibility, seven out of 82 pigs were F18R negative (8.54%), but only two of these seven pigs (2.44%) were also negative for F4R. As such, the chance to identify a pig that is positive for a F4 ETEC variant or F18+E. coli is 97.56%. Therefore, significant economic losses will arise due to F4+ and/or F18+E. coli infections in the Flemish pig population due to the high susceptibility prevalence.

Variation in 12 porcine genes involved in the carbohydrate moiety assembly of glycosphingolipids does not account for differential binding of F4 Escherichia coli and their fimbriae

BackgroundGlycosphingolipids (GSLs) are important membrane components composed of a carbohydrate structure attached to a hydrophobic ceramide. They can serve as specific membrane receptors for microbes and microbial products, such as F4 Escherichia coli (F4 ETEC) and isolated F4 fimbriae. The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that variation in genes involved in the assembly of the F4 binding carbohydrate moiety of GSLs (i.e. ARSA, B4GALT6, GAL3ST1, GALC, GBA, GLA, GLB1, GLB1L, NEU1, NEU2, UGCG, UGT8) could account for differential binding of F4 ETEC and their fimbriae.ResultsRT-PCR could not reveal any differential expression of the 12 genes in the jejunum of F4 receptor-positive (F4R+) and F4 receptor-negative (F4R-) pigs. Sequencing the complete open reading frame of the 11 expressed genes (NEU2 was not expressed) identified 72 mutations. Although some of them might have a structural effect, none of them could be associated with a F4R phenotype.ConclusionWe conclude that no regulatory or structural variation in any of the investigated genes is responsible for the genetic susceptibility of pigs towards F4 ETEC.