Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35989333›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2022

Host-pathogen coevolution drives innate immune response to Aphanomyces astaci infection in freshwater crayfish: transcriptomic evidence.

Ljudevit Luka Boštjančić, Caterina Francesconi, Christelle Rutz, Lucien Hoffbeck, Laetitia Poidevin, Arnaud Kress, Japo Jussila, Jenny Makkonen, Barbara Feldmeyer, Miklós Bálint and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The impacts of biological invasions.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The Crayfish Plague PathogenMicroorganisms · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Ljudevit Luka Boštjančić *LOEWE Centre for Translational Biodiversity Genomics (LOEWE-TBG), Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Georg-Voigt-Str. 14-16, 60325, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8941-9753
Caterina Francesconi *Institute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829, Landau, Germany. francesconi@uni-landau.de.
Christelle RutzDepartment of Computer Science, ICube, UMR 7357, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, Centre de Recherche en Biomédecine de Strasbourg, Rue Eugène Boeckel 1, 67000, Strasbourg, France.
Lucien HoffbeckDepartment of Computer Science, ICube, UMR 7357, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, Centre de Recherche en Biomédecine de Strasbourg, Rue Eugène Boeckel 1, 67000, Strasbourg, France.
Laetitia PoidevinDepartment of Computer Science, ICube, UMR 7357, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, Centre de Recherche en Biomédecine de Strasbourg, Rue Eugène Boeckel 1, 67000, Strasbourg, France.
Arnaud KressDepartment of Computer Science, ICube, UMR 7357, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, Centre de Recherche en Biomédecine de Strasbourg, Rue Eugène Boeckel 1, 67000, Strasbourg, France.
Japo JussilaDepartment of Environmental and Biological Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 1627, 70210, Kuopio, Finland.
Jenny MakkonenDepartment of Environmental and Biological Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 1627, 70210, Kuopio, Finland.
Barbara FeldmeyerLOEWE Centre for Translational Biodiversity Genomics (LOEWE-TBG), Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Georg-Voigt-Str. 14-16, 60325, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Miklós BálintLOEWE Centre for Translational Biodiversity Genomics (LOEWE-TBG), Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Georg-Voigt-Str. 14-16, 60325, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Klaus SchwenkInstitute for Environmental Sciences, University of Koblenz-Landau, Fortstrasse 7, 76829, Landau, Germany.
Odile LecompteDepartment of Computer Science, ICube, UMR 7357, University of Strasbourg, CNRS, Centre de Recherche en Biomédecine de Strasbourg, Rue Eugène Boeckel 1, 67000, Strasbourg, France.
Kathrin TheissingerLOEWE Centre for Translational Biodiversity Genomics (LOEWE-TBG), Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Georg-Voigt-Str. 14-16, 60325, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRSenckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre · DEUniversity of Koblenz and Landau · DEUniversity of Eastern Finland · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor over a century, scientists have studied host-pathogen interactions between the crayfish plague disease agent Aphanomyces astaci and freshwater crayfish. It has been hypothesised that North American crayfish hosts are disease-resistant due to the long-lasting coevolution with the pathogen. Similarly, the increasing number of latent infections reported in the historically sensitive European crayfish hosts seems to indicate that similar coevolutionary processes are occurring between European crayfish and A. astaci. Our current understanding of these host-pathogen interactions is largely focused on the innate immunity processes in the crayfish haemolymph and cuticle, but the molecular basis of the observed disease-resistance and susceptibility remain unclear. To understand how coevolution is shaping the host's molecular response to the pathogen, susceptible native European noble crayfish and invasive disease-resistant marbled crayfish were challenged with two A. astaci strains of different origin: a haplogroup A strain (introduced to Europe at least 50 years ago, low virulence) and a haplogroup B strain (signal crayfish in lake Tahoe, USA, high virulence). Here, we compare the gene expression profiles of the hepatopancreas, an integrated organ of crayfish immunity and metabolism.

resultsWe characterised several novel innate immune-related gene groups in both crayfish species. Across all challenge groups, we detected 412 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the noble crayfish, and 257 DEGs in the marbled crayfish. In the noble crayfish, a clear immune response was detected to the haplogroup B strain, but not to the haplogroup A strain. In contrast, in the marbled crayfish we detected an immune response to the haplogroup A strain, but not to the haplogroup B strain.

conclusionsWe highlight the hepatopancreas as an important hub for the synthesis of immune molecules in the response to A. astaci. A clear distinction between the innate immune response in the marbled crayfish and the noble crayfish is the capability of the marbled crayfish to mobilise a higher variety of innate immune response effectors. With this study we outline that the type and strength of the host immune response to the pathogen is strongly influenced by the coevolutionary history of the crayfish with specific A. astaci strains.

Indexed as

AphanomycesAnimalsAstacoideaDisease ResistanceLakesTranscriptomeAstacus astacusCrayfish plaguede novo assemblyDifferential gene expressionHepatopancreasInnate immune systemInvertebrate immune mechanismsNovel immune-related genesProcambarus virginalis

Identifiers

PMID35989333
PMCPMC9394032
OpenAlexW4292686647

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.