Next Article in Journal
Non-Psychrophilic Methanogens Capable of Growth Following Long-Term Extreme Temperature Changes, with Application to Mars
Next Article in Special Issue
Multi-Level Model to Predict Antibody Response to Influenza Vaccine Using Gene Expression Interaction Network Feature Selection
Previous Article in Journal
Coping with Environmental Eukaryotes; Identification of Pseudomonas syringae Genes during the Interaction with Alternative Hosts or Predators
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Microorganisms
Volume 6
Issue 2
10.3390/microorganisms6020033
microorganisms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Intracellular Bacterial Infections: A Challenge for Developing Cellular Mediated Immunity Vaccines for Farmed Fish

by
Hetron Mweemba Munang’andu
Section of Aquatic Medicine and Nutrition, Department of Basic Sciences and Aquatic Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Biosciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ullevålsveien 72, P.O. Box 8146, Dep NO-0033, 046 Oslo, Norway
Microorganisms 2018, 6(2), 33; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms6020033
Submission received: 13 March 2018 / Revised: 15 April 2018 / Accepted: 20 April 2018 / Published: 22 April 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Vaccine Informatics)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Aquaculture is one of the most rapidly expanding farming systems in the world. Its rapid expansion has brought with it several pathogens infecting different fish species. As a result, there has been a corresponding expansion in vaccine development to cope with the increasing number of infectious diseases in aquaculture. The success of vaccine development for bacterial diseases in aquaculture is largely attributed to empirical vaccine designs based on inactivation of whole cell (WCI) bacteria vaccines. However, an upcoming challenge in vaccine design is the increase of intracellular bacterial pathogens that are not responsive to WCI vaccines. Intracellular bacterial vaccines evoke cellular mediated immune (CMI) responses that “kill” and eliminate infected cells, unlike WCI vaccines that induce humoral immune responses whose protective mechanism is neutralization of extracellular replicating pathogens by antibodies. In this synopsis, I provide an overview of the intracellular bacterial pathogens infecting different fish species in aquaculture, outlining their mechanisms of invasion, replication, and survival intracellularly based on existing data. I also bring into perspective the current state of CMI understanding in fish together with its potential application in vaccine development. Further, I highlight the immunological pitfalls that have derailed our ability to produce protective vaccines against intracellular pathogens for finfish. Overall, the synopsis put forth herein advocates for a shift in vaccine design to include CMI-based vaccines against intracellular pathogens currently adversely affecting the aquaculture industry.

1. Introduction

Vaccination is an important disease control strategy that has significantly contributed to reduction of outbreaks and antibiotics use in aquaculture. Its first application in teleosts fish, was by Snieszko [1,2] who successfully immunized carp (Cyprinus carpio) against Aeromonas punctata in 1938. Similarly, Duff [3] successfully vaccinated rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) against Aeromonas salmonicida by injection and oral vaccine delivery in 1942. Since then, vaccine production has progressively expanded into a large commercial pharmaceutical industry alongside the expansion of aquaculture. Although bacterial vaccines have gained considerable success compared to viral vaccines in recent years, growing evidence shows that there are several emerging bacterial diseases in aquaculture not protected by current commercial vaccines. Thus, there is an urgent need to unravel the immunological pitfalls that hinder the success of these vaccines.
Empirical vaccines based on “killed” whole cell bacteria are by far the most widely known to confer protective immunity against bacterial diseases in aquaculture [4,5,6]. However, the type of adaptive immune response induced by vaccination is highly influenced by the site of antigen uptake. Antigens deposited extracellularly primarily evoke humoral immune responses that neutralize pathogens in body fluids while antigens deposited intracellularly evoke both humoral and cellular mediated immune (CMI) responses of which the latter response is specialized in “killing” and eliminating pathogen-infected cells [7]. The overall success of vaccination in aquaculture is largely attributed to whole cell inactivated (WCI) vaccines targeting extracellular pathogens while the route to success of vaccination against intracellular bacterial pathogens remains a challenge. Unlike the extracellular pathogens neutralized by antibody responses, intracellular pathogens evade antibody neutralization by replicating inside host cells. Therefore, the CMI response, which has the capacity to “kill” and eliminate infected cells is more protective against intracellular pathogens than humoral immunity. Hence, as the number of emerging intracellular pathogens continues to increase the need for CMI-based vaccines is bound to become paramount in aquaculture.
This review provides an overview of intracellular bacteria species infecting fish in aquaculture highlighting their mode of invasion, replication, and survival in infected cells. In addition, it brings into perspective an overview of the current understanding of fish CMI and immunological pitfalls limiting the design of protective vaccines against intracellular pathogens. The overall aim is to advocate for a shift in vaccine design from the widely used WCI vaccines that depend on antibody responses for neutralization of extracellular pathogens, to CMI-based vaccines able to kill and eliminate infected cells in order to reduce the prevalence of intracellular bacterial infections currently having adverse impacts on the aquaculture industry.

2. Overview of Intracellular Invasion, Survival, and Replication Strategies of Fish Bacteria

The mechanisms underlying entry into, and survival and replication in intracellular niches reveal specialized and common strategies shared by different bacterial species in establishing intracellular infections [8]. Intracellular bacteria localization can be divided into the following: (i) bacteria having cytoplasmic localization in the phagosome and hereby exist in the cytoplasm, such as Listeria monocytogenes [9,10]; (ii) intravascular bacteria that localize in nonacidic vacuoles of endosomes, such as Mycobacterium spp., which have been shown to inhibit maturation of phagolysosome fusion after being engulfed by phagocytosis [10,11,12]; and (iii) bacteria with intra-lysosomal localization in acidic and hydrolytic compartments that interact with endosomal networks of host cells, e.g., Yersinia [10]. Although these strategies are well studied in detail for pathogens of higher vertebrates, growing evidence shows that fish bacterial species belonging to the same genera with mammalian bacterial species could be using similar mechanisms in establishing their intracellular niches [13,14,15].
To survive intracellularly, pathogens require fitness genes to counteract host-killing mechanisms. Among these is the transport secretion system (TSS) used by many bacteria species to deliver toxins intracellularly in eukaryotic cells [16]. Secretion pathways involve 1–8 TSS genes that modulate cellular functions for the benefit of pathogens [17]. These genes encode various protein subsets that are secreted as effector molecules or translocation apparatus that form pores used for the transportation of effector molecules through host cell membranes [18]. Among these is T3SS, which functions as a macromolecular nanomachine found in most Gram-negative bacteria [19]. It has 20 different sub-proteins of which the core functional structure is a complex needle supramolecular structure used to deliver specific substrates in a sequential order across bacterial envelopes into host cells [16,20]. The T3SS translocate virulence proteins via the needle-shaped supramolecular structure into host cells. Table 1 shows a summary of intracellular bacteria infecting fish in aquaculture, while the common TSS genes found in fish intracellular bacteria are shown in Table 2.
Apart from acquisition of fitness genes, intracellular replicating bacteria develop other survival strategies that include (i) modulations of phagosome biogenesis to enable bacteria to resist acidic phagolysosomal environments [25,68,69], (ii) production of cytokines that regulate phagocytic cytocidal pathways to resist toxic reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, (iii) induction of anti-apoptosis pathways [26], (iv) modulation of cytokine balance to suppress proinflammatory processes elimination of infected cells and promote antinflammatory responses to enhance bacteria survival in infected cells [70,71], and (v) resist the killing effect of antimicrobial agents such as hepcidins [70]. Most of the intracellular bacterial pathogens causing disease in fish belong to the facultative bacteria species as previously classified by different scientists [72,73,74].

2.1. Edwardsiella tarda

Edwardsiella tarda is a facultative intracellular pathogen first reported in Japanese eel (Anguilla japonica) in 1962 in Japan [75] and characterized by Ewing et al. in 1965 [76]. Apart from fish, it has been isolated from different host species including snakes, amphibians, and mammals [77]. It enters macrophages by the clathrin- and caveolin-mediated endocytosis in which intracellular bacteria trafficking involves endosomes and endolysosomes [78]. Ling et al. [27] showed the invasion and internalization of E. tarda in vivo and in vitro using green fluorescent protein (GFP), while Qin et al. [28] attained internalization of the bacteria within 2 h after exposure to multiplicity of infections (MOIs) 10:1 and 100:1 in RAW264.7 cells. Once inside, the bacteria survive phagocytic defenses and replicates extensively in the macrophage vacuolar like compartments. T3SS and T6SS genes are essential for resisting phagocytic killing and are genetic hallmarks for distinguishing virulence from avirulent strains for E. tarda [18,26,79,80,81]. In addition, T3SS is required for intracellular replication and escape from infected macrophages, while T6SS is essential for intramacrophage infection as shown that T6SS mutants lose their adherence and invasion properties into macrophages [82]. Okuda et al. [26] showed that anti-apoptosis induction in E. tarda-infected cells was mediated by T3SS by upregulating NF-κB target genes such as Bcl2a1a, Bcl2a1b, cIAP-2, and TRAF-1 to protect infected macrophages from programmed cell death. In addition, T3SS was shown to downregulate IL-1β and block caspase-1-mediated cell death to prevent pyroptosis of E. tarda-infected macrophages. Tan et al. [18] showed that mutations involving genes such as esaB, escC, eseE, eseG, orf13, orf26, orf29, and orf30 in the T3SS gene cluster led to the failure of E. tarda to replicate in J774 macrophages and HEp-2 cells. They also showed that the virulence of E. tarda was severely affected by mutations of these genes in zebrafish (Danio rerio) in which they demonstrated that escC, orf13, orf19, orf29, and orf20 genes were required for intracellular replication and virulence [82]. Edwardsiella ictaluri modulates fish macrophage vacuolar pH and uses different proteins such as EsrA, EsrB, and EsrC and T3SS for its survival and replication in phagosomes of which mutational changes on some of these genes leads to failure of the bacteria to replicate in macrophages [83,56].
Nakhro et al. [84] and Srinivasa et al. [85] showed that E. tarda induces macrophages to produce superoxide anion and nitric oxide in common carp (Catla catla) and blue gourami (Trichopodus trichopterus) macrophages. They also showed that there was significant alteration in superoxide anion production by infected phagocytes, indicating that the bacteria was able to avoid or resist reactive-oxygen-species-mediated killing by the phagocytes. E.-tarda-induces macrophages to produce enzymes such as superoxidase dimutase (SOD), peroxidase, and catalase that are able to detoxify different reactive oxygen species (ROSs) and thus counteracts phagocyte-mediated killing [68,86]. Transcriptome analysis has shown that the bacterium has a broad range of inherent genes that are able to protect its cell wall from ROS damage, which broadens its capacity to cope with oxidative stress in order to enhance its survival intracellularly [69]. Apart from phagocytic cells, E. tarda infects epithelium papillosum of carp (EPC) cells, indicating that it is internalized by both phagocytic and non-phagocytic cells.

2.2. Piscirickettsia salmonis

Piscirickettsia salmonis is a facultative intracellular bacterium that causes hematocrit reduction and enlarged kidneys and spleen, in which all lymphoid tissues exhibit extensive necrosis leading to high mortalities [87,88]. The bacteria localizes in membrane bound cytoplasmic vacuoles in cells of lymphoid tissues. It propagates in macrophages and monocytes without inducing cytopathic effects (CPEs) [21] in which clathrin and actin cytoskeleton are required for its internalization into macrophages vacuoles [89]. Rojas et al. [90] showed that P. salmonis has the capacity to infect, survive, and replicate in the interior vacuoles of macrophages without inducing a characteristic cytopathic effect (CPE) by evading the phagolysosome activity and preventing the induction of apoptosis. McCarthy et al. [91] showed that the bacteria remains partially enclosed in the vacuole membranes, and escape into the cytoplasm is used as a means to avoid phagolysosomal fusion. Several nonphagocytic fish cell lines are also permissive to P. salmonis propagation in vitro such as chinook salmon embryo (CHSE)-214 from Onchorhynchus tshawytscha, Bluegill fry (BF)-2 fish cells from Lepomis macrochirus, CHum salmon Heart-1 (CHH-1) from Onchorhynchus keta, Coho Salmon Embryo (CSE)-119 cells from O. kisutch, EPC from Cyprinus carpio, and rainbow trout gonad-2 (RTG-2) from O. mykiss [21,90].
Genes shown to support intracellular survival of P. salmonis include clpB and bipA, which are upregulated during replication [92]. Both T3SS and T6SS are present in the P. salmonis genome although no studies have been done to demonstrate their functional mechanism in infected cells. Gomez et al. [93] showed that temporal acidification of cell free media resulted in overexpression of P. salmonis genes that inhibited phagosome-lysozyme fusion in order to prevent phagolysosome killing. To enhance its survival in infected cells, it upregulates antinflammatory cytokines such as IL-10 at early stages of its internalization to suppress induction of apoptosis and downregulates the expression of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) such as hepcidin [70], demonstrating that it creates a cytokine imbalance that promotes its survival and replication in macrophages.

2.3. Yersinia ruckeri

Yersinia ruckeri is a facultative intracellular bacterium first reported in the Hagerman Valley, Idaho, USA in the 1950 as the causative agent of enteric red mouth disease (ERM) in fish. Since then, it has been reported to infect several fish species. Its adherence, invasion, and intracellular replication has been demonstrated ex vivo in different cell lines [14,15]. Ryckaert et al. [94] showed its replication in rainbow trout macrophages in which it produces reactive oxygen species (ROS) reaching a peak within a few hours after exposure. Y. ruckeri was able to survive and increase its replicate in toxic ROS microenvironments of macrophage vacuoles. Using electron microscopy they showed that bacteria were sequestered in autophagocytic compartments without fusion with primary lysosomes. Pujo and Bliska [95] pointed out that different Yersinia species rely on a common set of “core” virulence determinants to infect their host cells, which is in line with Tsukamo et al. [96] who pointed out that Y. peudotuberculosis, Y. pestis, and Y. enterocolitica share the ability to replicate and survive in macrophages by inhibiting phagosome acidification. These bacteria prevent phagosome maturation and production of nitric acid, which is also essential for killing of intracellular pathogens [96,97]. Afonso et al. [98] showed localization of Y. ruckeri in neutrophils that showed fusion of cytoplasmic granules with the phagosome using electron microscope. Immersion infection of juvenile rainbow trout resulted in a steady increase of bacteria replication in the headkidney extracellularly. As infection progressed, it resulted in a predominant intracellular replication phase in macrophages similar to observations made by other scientists [95] who showed that the majority of Yersinia species replicate extracellularly before gaining access into intracellular niches. In line with other intracellular bacteria species, various secretion system genes such as T1SS, T2SS, T3SS, and T4SS have been characterized from the Y. ruckeri SC09 genome [19], which could play a vital role in niche adaptation and pathogenesis of the bacteria. T3SS, commonly referred to as Ysa in Yersinia, shares the same chromosome encoded for Y. enterocolitica biotype 1B, suggesting that these bacteria mediate their biological functions by adapting to similar intracellular niches in infected cells [19].

2.4. Francisella noatunensis noatunensis and Francisella noatunensis orientalis

Francisella noatunensis is a facultative intracellular bacterium that produces granuloma lesions in various fish species such as Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.), and Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) [99,100,101]. Francisella noatunensis noatunensis survives and replicates in monocyte/macrophage cultures and epithelial like cells derived from Atlantic cod larvae cells (ACL cells), of which entry is mediated by phagocytosis [99]. Furevik et al. [100] used confocal microscopy to show the intracellular localization of F. noatunensis in Atlantic cod macrophages, monocytes, neutrophils, and B-cells. In early stages of infection, bacteria were observed more frequently in headkidney tissues than in peripheral blood and spleen leucocytes. In infected fish, bacteria were initially grouped close together near the nucleus and later were found in the cytoplasm suggesting that this could have been due to regression from the phagosome to the cytoplasm. Similarly, Bokkemo et al. [99] used transmission electron microscopy to show that the bacteria were enclosed in a phagosomal membrane during the initial phase of infection. At a later stage, bacteria were found in large electron-lucent zones surrounded by intact or disintegrated membranes. Immune electron microscope analysis showed the release of bacteria from intracellular vesicles pointing to phagosomal membrane disintegration allowing the bacteria to escape into the cytoplasm. Infected macrophages suppressed IL-1β and IL-8 proinflammatory cytokine expression, but upregulated IL-10 and IL-12/IL-17 antinflammatory cytokines. Vestivik et al. [71] showed that F. noatunesis inhibits respiratory burst in Atlantic cod leucocytes. Recently, T3SS was been detected in the F. noatunensis orientalis genome [59], which could play an important role in internalization, survival, and replication of the bacteria intracellularly as seen with other intracellular bacteria.

2.5. Renibacterium salmoninarum

Renibacterium salmoninarum is a facultative intracellular pathogen first reported in wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L), brook (Salvelinus fontinalis), and brown trout (Salmo trutta) in the 1930s [46,47,48]. It is in the etiological agent for bacterial kidney disease (BKD), a chronic progressive granulomatous infection of salmonids mainly affecting the liver, kidney, and spleen. It survives and replicates in mononuclear phagocytic cells that protect bacteria from extracellular host defense mechanisms such as antibody binding and complement fixation [102]. In macrophages phagocytosis induces ROS and iNOS that does not inhibit replication of the bacteria [103]. The disease causes extensive tissue damage, induces a strong CMI response, macrophage proliferation, and activation, as well as deposition of immune complexes and type III hypersensitivity reaction [104]. The bacteria modulates host immune response to its advantage by interfering with cytokine responses and suppressing production of oxygen species (ROS) and antibody responses [105,106]. It uses its endogenous proteins such as p57 to suppress the expression of proinflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β, which also induces a chronic reduction in MHC-II expression and skews the T-cell responses toward the MHC-I pathway.

2.6. Other Intracellular Replicating Bacteria

Vibrio parahaemolyticus uses macrophages and neutrophils as its primary replication sites in infected fish, and its intracellular replication has been shown in Epinephelus awoara phagocytic cells [107]. Deletion of T6SS in V. parahaemolyticus reduces bacteria adhesion to monocytes and render the bacterium avirulent because of its inability to gain intracellular replication capacity [108]. The pathogens associated with epitheliocystis are intracellular replicating pathogens reported in Atlantic salmon, leafy seadragon (Phycodurus eques), silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus), and barramundi (Lates calcarifer) that include Candidatus Piscichlamydia salmonis taxonomically allocated within the order Chlamydiales [49,109]. Mycrobacteria marinum is an intracellular fish pathogen that replicates in macrophages [110]. Intravascular mycobacterium infections block phagosome-lysosome fusion, so vacuoles containing the bacteria do not acidify to pH < 6.5 as a survival strategy by blocking establishment of acidic environments in the vacuoles where they replicate. Several Mycobacterium spp. have been reported in fish associated with chronic granulomatous lesions (Table 1). Unlike other intracellular bacteria that use T3SS and T6SS genes for their survival, Mycobacterium spp. use T7SS for intracellular trafficking of proteins that enhance their survival in macrophages [111,64] (Table 2), which has also been detected in the M. marinum genome. Other intracellular bacteria include Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida the causative agent of photobacteriosis formerly known as fish pasteurellosis or pseudotuberculosis, which produces superoxidase dismutase (SOD) and catalase enzymes when exposed to oxidative stress as a survival strategy in macrophages [65]. Barnes et al. [65] showed that virulent strains with higher capacity to produce SOD and catalase had high survival and replication capacity in sole (Solea senegalensis, Kaup) phagocytes than the avirulent strains.

3. Vaccination and Adaptive Immune Responses

The central hallmark of vaccination is to prime the adaptive immune system by exposure to antigens of pathogens so that in subsequent exposure the immune system will mount a rapid protective response against the same pathogen. Like all vertebrates, the adaptive immune system of teleosts fish is subdivided into (i) cellular mediated immunity, whose mode of protection is to “kill” and eliminate pathogen-infected cells, and (ii) humoral immunity that depend on antibodies to neutralize pathogens in body fluids.

3.1. Cellular Mediated Immunity

Bacteria that replicate inside host cells are inaccessible for antibody neutralization in the extracellular matrix. The most effective adaptive immune protective mechanism against such pathogens is to “kill” and eliminate infected cells by the cellular mediated immune system. To do this, CD8 T-cells recognize infected cells by binding to MHC-I molecules expressing peptides processed from intracellular pathogens. The MHC-I ligands bind to their respective T-cell receptors (TCR) on the surface of CD8+ T-cells. It is noteworthy that all TCRs (α, β, γ, and δ) found in mammalian CD8 T-cells have been characterized in fish CD8 cells [112,113,114]. In addition, CD28 costimulatory and CTLA-4 negative regulatory markers that mediate the interaction between CD8+ cells and MHC-molecules have also been characterized in fish [115,116]. Upon binding to MHC-I molecules, naïve CD8 cells are activated into effector cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTLs) that secrete cytotoxic granules containing perforins and granzymes. Perforins form spores in target cell membranes enabling granzymes, which are serine protease enzymes, to enter the target cells and cleave to host proteins in order to induce apoptosis. To execute their effector functions, CD8+ cells are helped by CD4+ cells. Characteristic cytokine signatures mediate the differentiation of naïve CD4+ cells into different effector helper (Th) subtypes. For example, the differentiation of naïve CD4+ cells into Th1 cells is mediated by cytokines such as TNFα, IFNγ, and TGFβ, while specification into Th2 cells is mediated by cytokines such as IL-4/13 and IL-6. These cytokines play crucial roles in a paracrine and autocrine modulation of macrophage in activation of CD8+ cells against intracellular pathogens as well as induction of humoral immune responses against extracellular pathogens. Hence, a good understanding of cytokine signatures that skew CD4+ cells toward Th1 differentiation could serve as immune-adjuvants able to prime CD8+ cells in producing protective CMI responses against intracellular pathogens [7,117,118].

3.1.1. Edwardsiella tarda Cell-Mediated Immunity

Suffice to mention that the CMI responses against E. tarda have been studied in more detail using ginburna carp (Carassius auratus langsdorfii) than other intracellular bacteria species in fish [119]. Yamasaki et al. [120] showed higher protection in ginburna carp vaccinated against E. tarda using a live vaccine than with a WCI vaccine. The live vaccine induced high CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses alongside high antibody responses compared to the WCI vaccine that only induced antibody responses when CD4 and CD8 responses were suppressed. These findings show that vaccines that induce both high CMI and antibody responses produce higher protection than vaccines that only produce antibody responses. In addition, they observed an upregulation of IFNγ and T-bet that corresponded with an increase in CTL responses. To consolidate the findings that suggest that the CMI response is crucial for protection against Edwardsiellosis, Yamasaki et al. [121] adoptively transferred T-cells sensitized by E. tarda into isogenic naïve ginbuna crucian carp and showed that recipients of CD4+ and CD8+ cells acquired significantly high protection against E. tarda after challenge. They further observed that the passive transfer of CD8+ cells upregulated IFNγ and perforin consolidating the notion that protective immunity against E. tarda was highly dependent on IFNγ-mediated cell cytotoxicity. Matsuura et al. [122] showed enhanced expression of granzyme in ginburna crucian carp exposed to E. tarda infection by allosensitization. In addition, the direct antibacterial killing activity of E. tarda by activated CD8+ cells has been demonstrated by Nayak and Nakanishi [123,124]. Nayak and Teruyuki [123] further showed that CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells sensitized by E. tarda vaccination had a higher antibacterial activity than non-sensitized cells, demonstrating that immunization increases CTL effector functions. Moreover, the costimulatory CD28 molecule was upregulated in lymphoid organs of fish infected by E. tarda, indicating that this gene could play a vital role in activating CD8+ responses in fish [125].

3.1.2. Edwardsiella tarda Immunogenic Proteins for Cellular Mediated Immune Responses

Fang et al. [126] showed that E. tarda proteins such as EscE (Orf13) are involved in the activation of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses in fish. Mahendran et al. [127] used a computer-aided vaccine design approach for the prediction of proteins from the E. tarda outer membrane protein (Omp) that interact with MHC-I alleles. Two epitopes from E. tarda Omp exhibited excellent protein–peptide interaction when docked with MHC-I class alleles. Sun et al. [128,129] compared the efficacy of a subunit (rEta2) and DNA (pCEta2) vaccine made from Eta2 protein spanning 178 residues. The DNA vaccine (pCEta2) upregulated IFNγ, Mx, CD8α, MHC-1α, and IgM, while the subunit vaccine (rEta2) only upregulated IL-1β, complement C3, and IgM. Taken together, their findings showed that the DNA vaccine (pCEta2) induced both B- and T-cell responses, whereas the subunit vaccine (rEta2) only induced humoral responses. In another study, Sun et al. [129] cloned the Esa1 protein and produced a DNA vaccine (pCEsa1) that produced high protection accompanied by increased respiratory burst activity, bactericidal activity in headkidney macrophages, serum bactericidal activity in a ca(2+)-dependent manner, high IgM levels and upregulation of Th1 cytokine genes. Comparative analyses showed that the subunit vaccine (rEsa1), made from the gene (Esa1), was less protective than the DNA (pCEsa1) vaccine under severe challenge resulting in 92–97% mortality consolidating observations that replicative vaccines are more protective than non-replicative vaccines [130,131]. Similarly, Yang et al. [132,133] used RNA-seq to show that a live E. tarda vaccine revealed an activated MHC-I pathway and inhibited the MHC-II pathway during the early stages of response to immunization in zebrafish. They showed upregulation of the MHC-I pathway and activation of the CTL response when MCH-II pathway was downregulated. Other immunogenic proteins having the potential to serve as vaccine candidates for CMI responses against E. tarda are shown in Table 3.

3.1.3. Cellular Mediated Immunity Induced by Other Intracellular Bacteria

Comparison of fish intracellular bacteria species with their mammalian counterparts suggests that fish pathogens could be using mechanisms similar to mammalian pathogens in evoking CTL responses. Nagata and Koide [10] have pointed out that Yersinia infected vacuoles in macrophages are acidified by fusion with lysosomes leading to induction of CD4+ and CD8+ responses. Given that most Yersnia species use similar “core” survival and replication strategies in phagocytic cells, as pointed out by Puyol and Bliska [95], it is likely that similar CD4+ and CD8+ induction mechanisms might be in existence for Y. ruckeri in fish cells. A live vaccine against P. salmonis led to a significant reduction in mortality [142] compared to a WCI vaccine, while a transcriptome-based study done by Rozas-serri et al. [143] showed that P. salmonis skewed cytokine production toward IFNγ resulting in Th1 polarization and induction of CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell responses. Similarly, Bakkemo et al. [99] showed increased expression of IL-12/IL-17 that was linked to polarization of Th1 responses in Atlantic cod macrophages exposed to P. salmonis. In the case of R. salmoninarum, it has been shown that it uses its endogenous proteins such as p57 to suppress the expression of proinflammatory cytokines, such as IL-1β and MHC-II response. Consequently, it skews the T-cell responses toward MHC-I and CMI responses. In summary, these studies show that CMI-based vaccines are protective against intracellular bacterial infection than the non-replicative vaccines. Immunogenic proteins linked to the induction of CMI responses in P. salmonis and other bacteria species, excluding E. tarda, are shown in Table 4 and Table 5, respectively. In general, these studies show that more efforts have been directed at producing replicative vaccines using live attenuation and recombinant DNA technologies to generate CMI-based vaccines.

3.2. Humoral Immune Responses

There is a long successful history of vaccination against bacterial fish diseases mainly attributed to empirical vaccines targeting extracellular pathogens [159]. Conversely, the design of protective vaccines against intracellular bacterial infections is a challenge. This is because intracellular pathogens evade antibody neutralization by growing inside the host cells in which antibody responses induced by extracellular vaccines cannot neutralize the pathogens [160]. Park et al. [161] noted that much as progress in the search of protective vaccines against E. tarda has led to discovery of numerous vaccine candidates, these efforts have not been translated into commercial vaccines. Yamasaki et al. [162] observed that antibody responses from live vaccines only increased after bacteria clearance by CTLs, indicating humoral immune responses appears too late to provide protective immunity in fish vaccinated against E. tarda. Similarly, Evelyn et al. [106] showed that antibodies for R. salmoninarum were not protective against post-challenge infection, which is in line with observation made for P. salmonis that the majority of WCI vaccines fail to produce protection in vaccinated fish. Similarly, Cossarini-Dunier [163] suggested that protection against Y. ruckeri did not seem to be dependent on antibodies. Further, Raida and Buchmann [164] showed that passive immunization using transfer of plasma from vaccinated fish to naïve fish conferred no protection, suggesting that humoral responses such as IgM and complement are less protective against Y. ruckeri. The lack of in-vitro culture methods for Chlamydial pathogens makes it difficult to develop vaccines against epitheliocystis, so immune protective mechanisms based on vaccination have not been reported [165]. Overall, these studies show that humoral immune responses are not protective against intracellular pathogens in fish. However, in some cases, antibodies produce protection possibly by reacting with pathogens shortly after infection before entry into host cells or during cell-to-cell transmission. For example, Y. ruckeri does not survive intracellularly for a long time [94,166,167] and thus has an extracellular replication phase before entry into the intracellular compartments [95,98]. It is likely that antibodies neutralize the bacteria during extracellular replication before entry into the intracellular niches [168], which is contrary to observation made by Cossarini-Dunier [163] and Raida and Buchmann [164]. However, there is a need for detailed investigation aimed at identifying the most appropriate timing when vaccination would block infection from progressing into the intracellular phase by neutralizing the pathogens during the extracellular phase. Overall, the general observation shows that humoral immune responses are not protective against intracellular bacterial infections. Hence, the challenge is to develop protective CMI based vaccines.

4. General Discussion and Conclusions

One of the outstanding challenges of vaccine design for intracellular bacteria diseases is that the mechanisms of CMI response have not been elucidated for most fish species. The main driving force for vaccine research in aquaculture is the commercialization of fish production. Hence, fish species such as Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) that have recently gained commercial importance to become the second farmed species in the world in the last five years [169] lag behind in terms of immunology and vaccinology research than Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) that have been under commercial production for a long time. Therefore, several CMI studies have been carried out in salmonids than Nile tilapia. For example, the CD8α and CD8β genes characterized as molecular markers of activated CD8+ cells in salmonids [170] have not been characterized in Nile tilapia. TCRs chains together with their corresponding ligands on MHC molecules characterized in salmonids [171] have not been characterized in Nile tilapia. Previously, we used gene expression to elucidate the kinetics of CD4+ and CD8+ cells alongside their transcription factors such as GATA-3, T-bet, and eomesdermin in Atlantic salmon vaccinated against infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV) [172] of which most of these transcription factors have not been characterized in tilapia. There is need for the characterization of adaptive immunity genes for fish species entering commercial production in order to expedite the process of developing protective vaccines for both extra- and intracellular pathogens.
To prime the CMI with the protective capacity against subsequent infection, it is important that intracellular antigens activate the CD8+ T-cells. However, factors limiting the design of highly protective vaccines against intracellular fish pathogens are still a challenge. Cellular mechanisms leading to activation of CD8+ cells by various bacterial species localizing different intracellular niches have not been clearly elucidated in fishfish as done for viral pathogens [172,173,174]. Moreover, the network pathways evoked by intracellular bacteria have not been studied in detail as done in the case of viral infections [174,175,176]. The duration for which CD8+ cells activated by vaccination remain effective in “killing” infected cells has not been determined. As a result, optimal levels of CD8+ cell activation by vaccination able to confer protective immunity have not been determined. Thus, the measures of efficacy for activated CD8+ cells as a protective endpoint that correlate with post challenge survival proportions (PCSPs) in vaccinated fish are unknown. This is contrary to studies on humoral immune responses in which antibody titers that serve as protective endpoint correlating with PCSP in vaccinated fish have been determined for different vaccines [119,177,178,179,180,181]. Moreover, it remains unknown the extent to which mucosal vaccination can evoke protective immunity against intracellular replicating bacteria unlike in the case of viral and extracellular bacterial infections in which protective mechanisms have been widely studied [182,183,184,185]. Further, concurrent involvement of Th1 and Th2 responses in conjuring protective immunity is also a challenge given that optimal vaccine conditions that produce CD4+ levels able to potentiate CD8+ cells to produce protective immunity in vaccinated fish have not been determined. Hence, the practical conditions in which intracellular vaccination translates into protective CMI responses have not been determined for most fish vaccines. Until all these parameters are studied in detail as an overture to findings solutions to immunological pitfalls limiting the design of protective vaccines, production of highly protective vaccines for intracellular bacteria remains a challenge. Thus, the ultimate challenge is to apply our limited understanding of CMI responses in designing protective vaccines for intracellular bacteria in fish. Existing evidence shows that the production of CMI-based vaccines would be the most effective approach able to reduce persistence of outbreaks caused by intracellular bacterial infections adversely affecting the aquaculture industry.

Acknowledgments

The Nanoparticle Encapsulation of Plant-Based Vaccines against Piscine Reovirus (PRV) Norwegian Research Council Project number 239140 financed the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Snieszko, S.; Piotrowska, W.; Kocylowski, B.; Marek, K. Badania Bakteriologiczne I Serogiczne nad Bakteriami Posocznicy Karp; Memoires de l’Institut d’Ichtyobiologie et Pisciculture de la Station de Pisciculture Experimentale a Mydlniki de l’Universite Jagiellonienne a Cracovie: Kraków, Poland, 1938. [Google Scholar]
  2. Gudding, R.; Van Muiswinkel, W.B. A history of fish vaccination: Science-based disease prevention in aquaculture. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2013, 35, 1683–1688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Duff, D. The oral immunization of trout against Bacterium salmonicida. J. Immunol. 1942, 44, 87–94. [Google Scholar]
  4. Evelyn, T. A historical review of fish vaccinology. Dev. Biol. Stand. 1997, 90, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Tebbit, G.; Erikson, J.; Vande Water, R. Development and use of Yersinia ruckeri bacterins to control enteric redmouth disease. Dev. Biol. Stand. 1980, 6, 261–266. [Google Scholar]
  6. Eisenstein, T.K. Intracellular pathogens: The role of antibody-mediated protection in Salmonella infection. Trends Microbiol. 1998, 6, 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Munang’andu, H.M.; Evensen, Ø. A review of intra-and extracellular antigen delivery systems for virus vaccines of finfish. J. Immunol. Res. 2015, 2015, 960819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Cossart, P.; Sansonetti, P.J. Bacterial invasion: The paradigms of enteroinvasive pathogens. Science 2004, 304, 242–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Cossart, P.; Mengaud, J. Listeria monocytogenes. A model system for the molecular study of intracellular parasitism. Mol. Biol. Med. 1989, 6, 463–474. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  10. Nagata, T.; Koide, Y. Induction of Specific CD8+ T Cells against Intracellular Bacteria by CD8+ T-Cell-Oriented Immunization Approaches. BioMed Res. Int. 2010, 2010, 764542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Hess, J.; Schaible, U.; Raupach, B.; Kaufmann, S.H. Exploiting the immune system: Toward new vaccines against intracellular bacteria. Adv. Immunol. 2000, 75, 88. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kaufmann, S.H. Immunity to intracellular bacteria. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 1993, 11, 129–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sjödin, A.; Svensson, K.; Öhrman, C.; Ahlinder, J.; Lindgren, P.; Duodu, S.; Johansson, A.; Colquhoun, D.J.; Larsson, P.; Forsman, M. Genome characterisation of the genus Francisella reveals insight into similar evolutionary paths in pathogens of mammals and fish. BMC Genom. 2012, 13, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kawula, T.H.; Lelivelt, M.J.; Orndorff, P.E. Using a new inbred fish model and cultured fish tissue cells to study Aeromonas hydrophila and Yersinia ruckeri pathogenesis. Microb. Pathog. 1996, 20, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Romalde, J.L.; Toranzo, A.E. Pathological activities of Yersinia ruckeri, the enteric redmouth (ERM) bacterium. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1993, 112, 291–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Galán, J.E.; Lara-Tejero, M.; Marlovits, T.C.; Wagner, S. Bacterial type III secretion systems: Specialized nanomachines for protein delivery into target cells. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 2014, 68, 415–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Izore, T.; Job, V.; Dessen, A. Biogenesis, regulation, and targeting of the type III secretion system. Structure 2011, 19, 603–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Tan, Y.; Zheng, J.; Tung, S.; Rosenshine, I.; Leung, K. Role of type III secretion in Edwardsiella tarda virulence. Microbiology 2005, 151, 2301–2313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Liu, T.; Wang, K.-Y.; Wang, J.; Chen, D.-F.; Huang, X.-L.; Ouyang, P.; Geng, Y.; He, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Min, J. Genome sequence of the fish pathogen Yersinia ruckeri SC09 provides insights into niche adaptation and pathogenic mechanism. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2016, 17, 557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Dean, P. Functional domains and motifs of bacterial type III effector proteins and their roles in infection. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2011, 35, 1100–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Rojas, V.; Galanti, N.; Bols, N.C.; Marshall, S.H. Productive infection of Piscirickettsia salmonis in macrophages and monocyte-like cells from rainbow trout, a possible survival strategy. J. Cell. Biochem. 2009, 108, 631–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Barnes, M.; Landolt, M.; Powell, D.; Winton, J. Purification of Piscirickettsia salmonis and partial characterization of antigens. Dis. Aquat. Org. 1998, 33, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Fryer, J.; Hedrick, R. Piscirickettsia salmonis: A Gram-negative intracellular bacterial pathogen of fish. J. Fish Dis. 2003, 26, 251–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kuzyk, M.A.; Thorton, J.C.; Kay, W.W. Antigenic characterization of the salmonid pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. Infect. Immun. 1996, 64, 5205–5210. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  25. Qin, L.; Sun, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Xu, J.; Bi, K. In vitro model to estimate Edwardsiella tarda-macrophage interactions using RAW264. 7 cells. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2017, 60, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Okuda, J.; Arikawa, Y.; Takeuchi, Y.; Mahmoud, M.M.; Suzaki, E.; Kataoka, K.; Suzuki, T.; Okinaka, Y.; Nakai, T. Intracellular replication of Edwardsiella tarda in murine macrophage is dependent on the type III secretion system and induces an up-regulation of anti-apoptotic NF-κB target genes protecting the macrophage from staurosporine-induced apoptosis. Microb. Pathog. 2006, 41, 226–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Ling, S.H.M.; Wang, X.; Xie, L.; Lim, T.; Leung, K. Use of green fluorescent protein (GFP) to study the invasion pathways of Edwardsiella tarda in in vivo and in vitro fish models. Microbiology 2000, 146, 7–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Qin, L.; Li, F.; Wang, X.; Sun, Y.; Bi, K.; Gao, Y. Proteomic analysis of macrophage in response to Edwardsiella tarda-infection. Microb. Pathog. 2017, 111, 86–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Wang, X.; Wang, Q.; Yang, M.; Xiao, J.; Liu, Q.; Wu, H.; Zhang, Y. QseBC controls flagellar motility, fimbrial hemagglutination and intracellular virulence in fish pathogen Edwardsiella tarda. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2011, 30, 944–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Han, H.J.; Kim, D.H.; Lee, D.C.; Kim, S.M.; Park, S.I. Pathogenicity of Edwardsiella tarda to olive flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus (Temminck & Schlegel). J. Fish Dis. 2006, 29, 601–609. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  31. Takano, T.; Matsuyama, T.; Oseko, N.; Sakai, T.; Kamaishi, T.; Nakayasu, C.; Sano, M.; Iida, T. The efficacy of five avirulent Edwardsiella tarda strains in a live vaccine against Edwardsiellosis in Japanese flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2010, 29, 687–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Soto, E.; Wiles, J.; Elzer, P.; Macaluso, K.; Hawke, J.P. Attenuated Francisella asiatica iglC mutant induces protective immunity to francisellosis in tilapia. Vaccine 2011, 29, 593–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Soto, E.; Fernandez, D.; Thune, R.; Hawke, J.P. Interaction of Francisella asiatica with tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) innate immunity. Infect. Immun. 2010, 78, 2070–2078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Hsieh, C.; Tung, M.; Tu, C.; Chang, C.; Tsai, S. Enzootics of visceral granulomas associated with Francisella-like organism infection in tilapia (Oreochromis spp.). Aquaculture 2006, 254, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Nylund, A.; Ottem, K.F.; Watanabe, K.; Karlsbakk, E.; Krossøy, B. Francisella sp.(Family Francisellaceae) causing mortality in Norwegian cod (Gadus morhua) farming. Arch. Microbiol. 2006, 185, 383–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Gjessing, M.; Inami, M.; Weli, S.; Ellingsen, T.; Falk, K.; Koppang, E.; Kvellestad, A. Presence and interaction of inflammatory cells in the spleen of Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua L., infected with Francisella noatunensis. J. Fish Dis. 2011, 34, 687–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Burdette, D.L.; Yarbrough, M.L.; Orvedahl, A.; Gilpin, C.J.; Orth, K. Vibrio parahaemolyticus orchestrates a multifaceted host cell infection by induction of autophagy, cell rounding, and then cell lysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 12497–12502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. do Vale, A.; Marques, F.; Silva, M.T. Apoptosis of sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax L.) neutrophils and macrophages induced by experimental infection with Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2003, 15, 129–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. López-Dóriga, M.V.; Barnes, A.C.; dos Santos, N.M.; Ellis, A.E. Invasion of fish epithelial cells by Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida: Evidence for receptor specificity, and effect of capsule and serum. Microbiology 2000, 146, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Kebbi-Beghdadi, C.; Batista, C.; Greub, G. Permissivity of fish cell lines to three Chlamydia-related bacteria: Waddlia chondrophila, Estrella lausannensis and Parachlamydia acanthamoebae. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 2011, 63, 339–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. de Barsy, M.; Greub, G. Waddlia chondrophila: From biology to pathogenicity. Microbes Infect. 2013, 15, 1033–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Seth-Smith, H.M.; Dourala, N.; Fehr, A.; Qi, W.; Katharios, P.; Ruetten, M.; Mateos, J.M.; Nufer, L.; Weilenmann, R.; Ziegler, U. Emerging pathogens of gilthead seabream: Characterisation and genomic analysis of novel intracellular β-proteobacteria. ISME J. 2016, 10, 1791–1803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Novotny, L.; Halouzka, R.; Matlova, L.; Vavra, O.; Bartosova, L.; Slany, M.; Pavlik, I. Morphology and distribution of granulomatous inflammation in freshwater ornamental fish infected with mycobacteria. J. Fish Dis. 2010, 33, 947–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Aronson, J.D. Spontaneous tuberculosis in salt water fish. J. Infect. Dis. 1926, 315–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Dos Santos, N.; Do Vale, A.; Sousa, M.; Silva, M. Mycobacterial infection in farmed turbot Scophthalmus maximus. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2002, 52, 87–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Earp, B.J.; Ellis, C.; Ordal, E.J. Kidney Disease in Young Salmon. M.S. Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA, 1953. [Google Scholar]
  47. Simpson, J.T.; Wong, K.; Jackman, S.D.; Schein, J.E.; Jones, S.J.; Birol, I. ABySS: A parallel assembler for short read sequence data. Genome Res. 2009, 19, 1117–1123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Smith, I.W.; Agriculture, D.O.; Scotland, F.F. The Occurrence and Pathology of Dee Disease; Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland: Scotland, UK, 1964.
  49. Toenshoff, E.R.; Kvellestad, A.; Mitchell, S.O.; Steinum, T.; Falk, K.; Colquhoun, D.J.; Horn, M. A novel betaproteobacterial agent of gill epitheliocystis in seawater farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e32696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Morrison, R.; Young, N.; Knowles, G.; Cornish, M.; Carson, J. Isolation of Tasmanian Rickettsia-like organism (RLO) from farmed salmonids: Identification of multiple serotypes and confirmation of pathogenicity. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2016, 122, 85–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Corbeil, S.; Hyatt, A.D.; Crane, M.S.J. Characterisation of an emerging rickettsia-like organism in Tasmanian farmed Atlantic salmon Salmo salar. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2005, 64, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Xu, T.; Zhang, X.-H. Edwardsiella tarda: An intriguing problem in aquaculture. Aquaculture 2014, 431, 129–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Shao, S.; Lai, Q.; Liu, Q.; Wu, H.; Xiao, J.; Shao, Z.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Y. Phylogenomics characterization of a highly virulent Edwardsiella strain ET080813 T encoding two distinct T3SS and three T6SS gene clusters: Propose a novel species as Edwardsiella anguillarum sp. nov. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 2015, 38, 36–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Sepúlveda, V.; Scarlett, T. Differential Gene Expression of Piscirickettsia salmonis Strains in Adaptive Response to Different Culture Systems: A Strategy to Identify Possible Intracellular Survival Mechanisms and Pathogenicity. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  55. Cortés Sobarzo, M.A. Study of the Type 4B Protein Secretion System (Dot/Icm) and the Effector Protein SdhA in Piscirickettsia salmonis. Ph.D. Thesis, Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  56. Rogge, M.L.; Thune, R.L. Regulation of the Edwardsiella ictaluri type III secretion system by pH and phosphate concentration through EsrA, EsrB, and EsrC. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011, 77, 4293–4302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Ludu, J.S.; de Bruin, O.M.; Duplantis, B.N.; Schmerk, C.L.; Chou, A.Y.; Elkins, K.L.; Nano, F.E. The Francisella pathogenicity island protein PdpD is required for full virulence and associates with homologues of the type VI secretion system. J. Bacteriol. 2008, 190, 4584–4595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Nano, F.E.; Schmerk, C. The Francisella pathogenicity island. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2007, 1105, 122–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Sridhar, S.; Sharma, A.; Kongshaug, H.; Nilsen, F.; Jonassen, I. Whole genome sequencing of the fish pathogen Francisella noatunensis subsp. orientalis Toba04 gives novel insights into Francisella evolution and pathogenecity. BMC Genom. 2012, 13, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Makino, K.; Oshima, K.; Kurokawa, K.; Yokoyama, K.; Uda, T.; Tagomori, K.; Iijima, Y.; Najima, M.; Nakano, M.; Yamashita, A. Genome sequence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus: A pathogenic mechanism distinct from that of V cholerae. Lancet 2003, 361, 743–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Wang, R.; Zhong, Y.; Gu, X.; Yuan, J.; Saeed, A.F.; Wang, S. The pathogenesis, detection, and prevention of Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. von Tils, D.; Blädel, I.; Schmidt, M.A.; Heusipp, G. Type II secretion in Yersinia—A secretion system for pathogenicity and environmental fitness. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiology. 2012, 2, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Cui, S.; Xiao, J.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Y. H-NS binding to evpB and evpC and repressing T6SS expression in fish pathogen Edwardsiella piscicida. Arch. Microbiol. 2016, 198, 653–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Abdallah, A.M.; Verboom, T.; Hannes, F.; Safi, M.; Strong, M.; Eisenberg, D.; Musters, R.J.; Vandenbroucke-Grauls, C.M.; Appelmelk, B.J.; Luirink, J. A specific secretion system mediates PPE41 transport in pathogenic mycobacteria. Mol. Microbiol. 2006, 62, 667–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Weerdenburg, E.M.; Abdallah, A.M.; Mitra, S.; De Punder, K.; Van Der Wel, N.N.; Bird, S.; Appelmelk, B.J.; Bitter, W.; Van Der Sar, A.M. ESX-5-deficient Mycobacterium marinum is hypervirulent in adult zebrafish. Cell. Microbiol. 2012, 14, 728–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Balado, M.; Lemos, M.L.; Osorio, C.R. Genetic characterization of pPHDP60, a novel conjugative plasmid from the marine fish pathogen Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida. Plasmid 2013, 70, 154–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Qi, W.; Vaughan, L.; Katharios, P.; Schlapbach, R.; Seth-Smith, H.M. Host-associated genomic features of the novel uncultured intracellular pathogen Ca. Ichthyocystis revealed by direct sequencing of epitheliocysts. Genome Biol. Evol. 2016, 8, 1672–1689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Padros, F.; Zarza, C.; Dopazo, L.; Cuadrado, M.; Crespo, S. Pathology of Edwardsiella tarda infection in turbot, Scophthalmus maximus (L.). J. Fish Dis. 2006, 29, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Wang, Q.; Yang, M.; Xiao, J.; Wu, H.; Wang, X.; Lv, Y.; Xu, L.; Zheng, H.; Wang, S.; Zhao, G. Genome sequence of the versatile fish pathogen Edwardsiella tarda provides insights into its adaptation to broad host ranges and intracellular niches. PLoS ONE 2009, 4, e7646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Álvarez, C.A.; Gomez, F.A.; Mercado, L.; Ramírez, R.; Marshall, S.H. Piscirickettsia salmonis Imbalances the Innate Immune Response to Succeed in a Productive Infection in a Salmonid Cell Line Model. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0163943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Vestvik, N.; Rønneseth, A.; Kalgraff, C.A.; Winther-Larsen, H.C.; Wergeland, H.I.; Haugland, G.T. Francisella noatunensis subsp. noatunensis replicates within Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.) leucocytes and inhibits respiratory burst activity. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2013, 35, 725–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Brubaker, R. Mechanisms of bacterial virulence. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1985, 39, 21–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Moulder, J.W. The Biochemistry of Intracellular Parasitism. In The Biochemistry of Intracellular Parasitism; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1962. [Google Scholar]
  74. Goodpasture, E.W. Intracellular parasitism and the cytotropism of viruses. South. Med. J. 1936, 29, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hoshina, T. On a new bacterium, Paracolobactrum anguillimortiferum n. sp. Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish 1962, 28, 162–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Ewing, W.; McWhorter, A.; Escobar, M.; Lubin, A. Edwardsiella, a new genus of Enterobacteriaceae based on a new species, E. tarda. Int. J. Syst. Evolut. Microbiol. 1965, 15, 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Sakazaki, R. A proposed group of the family Enterobacteriaceae, the Asakusa group. Int. J. Syst. Evolut. Microbiol. 1965, 15, 45–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Sui, Z.-H.; Xu, H.; Wang, H.; Jiang, S.; Chi, H.; Sun, L. Intracellular Trafficking Pathways of Edwardsiella tarda: From Clathrin-and Caveolin-Mediated Endocytosis to Endosome and Lysosome. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2017, 7, 400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Wang, X.; Wang, Q.; Xiao, J.; Liu, Q.; Wu, H.; Xu, L.; Zhang, Y. Edwardsiella tarda T6SS component evpP is regulated by esrB and iron, and plays essential roles in the invasion of fish. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2009, 27, 469–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Rao, P.; Yamada, Y.; Tan, Y. Use of proteomics to identify novel virulence determinants that are required for Edwardsiella tarda pathogenesis. Mol. Microbiol. 2004, 53, 573–586. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  81. Sakai, T.; Matsuyama, T.; Sano, M.; Iida, T. Identification of novel putative virulence factors, adhesin AIDA and type VI secretion system, in atypical strains of fish pathogenic Edwardsiella tarda by genomic subtractive hybridization. Microbiol. Immunol. 2009, 53, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Okuda, J.; Takeuchi, Y.; Nakai, T. Type III secretion system genes of Edwardsiella tarda associated with intracellular replication and virulence in zebrafish. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2014, 111, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Baumgartner, W.A.; Dubytska, L.; Rogge, M.L.; Mottram, P.J.; Thune, R.L. Modulation of vacuolar pH is required for replication of Edwardsiella ictaluri in channel catfish macrophages. Infect. Immun. 2014, 82, 2329–2336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Nakhro, K.; Devi, T.B.; Kamilya, D. In vitro immunopathogenesis of Edwardsiella tarda in catla Catla catla (Hamilton). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2013, 35, 175–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Rao, P.S.S.; Lim, T.M.; Leung, K.Y. Opsonized virulent Edwardsiella tarda strains are able to adhere to and survive and replicate within fish phagocytes but fail to stimulate reactive oxygen intermediates. Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 5689–5697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Xiao, J.; Wang, Q.; Liu, Q.; Xu, L.; Wang, X.; Wu, H.; Zhang, Y. Characterization of Edwardsiella tarda rpoS: Effect on serum resistance, chondroitinase activity, biofilm formation, and autoinducer synthetases expression. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2009, 83, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Machuca, A.; Martinez, V. Transcriptome analysis of the intracellular facultative pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis: Expression of putative groups of genes associated with virulence and iron metabolism. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0168855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Gómez, F.; Henríquez, V.; Marshall, S. Additional evidence of the facultative intracellular nature of the fish bacterial pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. Arch. Med. Vet. 2009, 41, 261–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Ramírez, R.; Gómez, F.A.; Marshall, S.H. The infection process of Piscirickettsia salmonis in fish macrophages is dependent upon interaction with host-cell clathrin and actin. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2015, 362, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Rojas, V.; Galanti, N.; Bols, N.C.; Jiménez, V.; Paredes, R.; Marshall, S.H. Piscirickettsia salmonis induces apoptosis in macrophages and monocyte-like cells from rainbow trout. J. Cell. Biochem. 2010, 110, 468–476. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  91. McCarthy, Ú.M.; Bron, J.E.; Brown, L.; Pourahmad, F.; Bricknell, I.R.; Thompson, K.D.; Adams, A.; Ellis, A.E. Survival and replication of Piscirickettsia salmonis in rainbow trout head kidney macrophages. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2008, 25, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Isla, A.; Haussmann, D.; Vera, T.; Kausel, G.; Figueroa, J. Identification of the clpB and bipA genes and an evaluation of their expression as related to intracellular survival for the bacterial pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. Vet. Microbiol. 2014, 173, 390–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Gomez, F.A.; Tobar, J.A.; Henríquez, V.; Sola, M.; Altamirano, C.; Marshall, S.H. Evidence of the presence of a functional Dot/Icm type IV-B secretion system in the fish bacterial pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e54934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Ryckaert, J.; Bossier, P.; D’Herde, K.; Diez-Fraile, A.; Sorgeloos, P.; Haesebrouck, F.; Pasmans, F. Persistence of Yersinia ruckeri in trout macrophages. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2010, 29, 648–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Pujol, C.; Bliska, J.B. Turning Yersinia pathogenesis outside in: Subversion of macrophage function by intracellular yersiniae. Clin. Immunol. 2005, 114, 216–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Tsukano, H.; Kura, F.; Inoue, S.; Sato, S.; Izumiya, H.; Yasuda, T.; Watanabe, H. Yersinia pseudotuberculosis blocks the phagosomal acidification of B10. A mouse macrophages through the inhibition of vacuolar H+-ATPase activity. Microb. Pathog. 1999, 27, 253–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Tobback, E.; Decostere, A.; Hermans, K.; Haesebrouck, F.; Chiers, K. Yersinia ruckeri infections in salmonid fish. J. Fish Dis. 2007, 30, 257–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Afonso, A.; Lousada, S.; Silva, J.; Ellis, A.E.; Silva, M.T. Neutrophil and macrophage responses to inflammation in the peritoneal cavity of rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. A light and electron microscopic cytochemical study. Dis. Aquat. Org. 1998, 34, 27–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Bakkemo, K.R.; Mikkelsen, H.; Johansen, A.; Robertsen, B.; Seppola, M. Francisella noatunensis subsp. noatunensis invades, survives and replicates in Atlantic cod cells. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2016, 121, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Furevik, A.; Pettersen, E.F.; Colquhoun, D.; Wergeland, H.I. The intracellular lifestyle of Francisella noatunensis in Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.) leucocytes. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2011, 30, 488–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Ortega, C.; Mancera, G.; Enríquez, R.; Vargas, A.; Martínez, S.; Fajardo, R.; Avendaño-Herrera, R.; Navarrete, M.J.; Romero, A. First identification of Francisella noatunensis subsp. orientalis causing mortality in Mexican tilapia Oreochromis spp. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2016, 120, 205–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Young, C.L.; Chapman, G.B. Ultrastructural aspects of the causative agent and renal histopathology of bacterial kidney disease in brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). J. Fish. Board Can. 1978, 35, 1234–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Hardie, L.; Ellis, A.; Secombes, C. In vitro activation of rainbow trout macrophages stimulates inhibition of Renibacterium salmoninarum growth concomitant with augmented generation of respiratory burst products. Dis. Aquat. Org. 1996, 25, 175–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Wiens, G.D. Bacterial kidney disease (Renibacterium salmoninarum). Fish Dis. Disord. 2011, 3, 338–374. [Google Scholar]
  105. Turaga, P.; Wiens, G.; Kaattari, S. Bacterial kidney disease: The potential role of soluble protein antigen (s). J. Fish Biol. 1987, 31, 191–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Brown, L.L.; Iwama, G.K.; Evelyn, T.P. The effect of early exposure of Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) eggs to the p57 protein of Renibacterium salmoninarumon the development of immunity to the pathogen. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 1996, 6, 149–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Xu, X.; Sang, B.; Chen, W.; Yan, Q.; Xiong, Z.; Su, J.; Zou, W. Intracellular survival of virulence and low-virulence strains of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Epinephelus awoara macrophages and peripheral leukocytes. Genet. Mol. Res. 2015, 14, 706–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Yu, Y.; Yang, H.; Li, J.; Zhang, P.; Wu, B.; Zhu, B.; Zhang, Y.; Fang, W. Putative type VI secretion systems of Vibrio parahaemolyticus contribute to adhesion to cultured cell monolayers. Arch. Microbiol. 2012, 194, 827–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Meijer, A.; Roholl, P.J.; Ossewaarde, J.M.; Jones, B.; Nowak, B.F. Molecular evidence for association of Chlamydiales bacteria with epitheliocystis in leafy seadragon (Phycodurus eques), silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus), and barramundi (Lates calcarifer). Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 284–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Karlsen, M.; Nylund, A.; Watanabe, K.; Helvik, J.V.; Nylund, S.; Plarre, H. Characterization of ‘Candidatus Clavochlamydia salmonicola’: An intracellular bacterium infecting salmonid fish. Environ. Microbiol. 2008, 10, 208–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Tong, J.; Meng, L.; Wang, X.; Liu, L.; Lyu, L.; Wang, C.; Li, Y.; Gao, Q.; Yang, C.; Niu, C. The FBPase Encoding Gene glpX Is Required for Gluconeogenesis, Bacterial Proliferation and Division In Vivo of Mycobacterium marinum. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0156663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Barnes, A.C.; Balebona, M.C.; Horne, M.T.; Ellis, A.E. Superoxide dismutase and catalase in Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicida and their roles in resistance to reactive oxygen species. Microbiology 1999, 145, 483–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Nam, B.-H.; Hirono, I.; Aoki, T. The four TCR genes of teleost fish: The cDNA and genomic DNA analysis of Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) TCR α-, β-, γ-, and δ-chains. J. Immunol. 2003, 170, 3081–3090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Partula, S.; de Guerra, A.; Fellah, J.S.; Charlemagne, J. Structure and diversity of the TCR α-chain in a teleost fish. J. Immunol. 1996, 157, 207–212. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  115. Bernard, D.; Riteau, B.; Hansen, J.D.; Phillips, R.B.; Michel, F.; Boudinot, P.; Benmansour, A. Costimulatory receptors in a teleost fish: Typical CD28, elusive CTLA4. J. Immunol. 2006, 176, 4191–4200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Bernard, D.; Hansen, J.D.; Du Pasquier, L.; Lefranc, M.-P.; Benmansour, A.; Boudinot, P. Costimulatory receptors in jawed vertebrates: Conserved CD28, odd CTLA4 and multiple BTLAs. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2007, 31, 255–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Chang, C.J.; Gu, J.; Robertsen, B. Protective effect and antibody response of DNA vaccine against salmonid αvirus 3 (SAV3) in Atlantic salmon. J. Fish Dis. 2017, 40, 1775–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Tafalla, C.; Bøgwald, J.; Dalmo, R.A.; Munang’andu, H.M.; Evensen, Ø. Adjuvants in fish vaccines. In Fish Vaccination; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 68–84. [Google Scholar]
  119. Munang’andu, H.M.; Evensen, Ø. Correlates of protective immunity for fish vaccines. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Yamasaki, M.; Araki, K.; Maruyoshi, K.; Matsumoto, M.; Nakayasu, C.; Moritomo, T.; Nakanishi, T.; Yamamoto, A. Comparative analysis of adaptive immune response after vaccine trials using live attenuated and formalin-killed cells of Edwardsiella tarda in ginbuna crucian carp (Carassius auratus langsdorfii). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2015, 45, 437–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Yamasaki, M.; Araki, K.; Nakanishi, T.; Nakayasu, C.; Yamamoto, A. Role of CD4+ and CD8α+ T cells in protective immunity against Edwardsiella tarda infection of ginbuna crucian carp, Carassius auratus langsdorfii. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2014, 36, 299–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Matsuura, Y.; Yabu, T.; Shiba, H.; Moritomo, T.; Nakanishi, T. Identification of a novel fish granzyme involved in cell-mediated immunity. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2014, 46, 499–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Nayak, S.K.; Nakanishi, T. Direct antibacterial activity of CD8+/CD4+ T-cells in ginbuna crucian carp, Carassius auratus langsdorfii. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2013, 34, 136–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Matsuyama, T.; Fujiwara, A.; Nakayasu, C.; Kamaishi, T.; Oseko, N.; Hirono, I.; Aoki, T. Gene expression of leucocytes in vaccinated Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) during the course of experimental infection with Edwardsiella tarda. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2007, 22, 598–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Jeswin, J.; Jeong, S.-M.; Jeong, J.-M.; Bae, J.-S.; Kim, M.-C.; Kim, D.-H.; Park, C.-I. Molecular characterization of a T cell co-stimulatory receptor, CD28 of rock bream (Oplegnathus fasciatus): Transcriptional expression during bacterial and viral stimulation. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2017, 66, 354–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Lu, J.F.; Wang, W.N.; Wang, G.L.; Zhang, H.; Zhou, Y.; Gao, Z.P.; Nie, P.; Xie, H.X. Edwardsiella tarda EscE (Orf13 protein) is a type III secretion system-secreted protein that is required for the injection of effectors, secretion of translocators, and pathogenesis in fish. Infect. Immun. 2016, 84, 2–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Mahendran, R.; Jeyabaskar, S.; Sitharaman, G.; Michael, R.D.; Paul, A.V. Computer-aided vaccine designing approach against fish pathogens Edwardsiella tarda and Flavobacterium columnare using bioinformatics softwares. Drug Des. Dev. Ther. 2016, 10, 1703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Sun, Y.; Liu, C.-S.; Sun, L. Comparative study of the immune effect of an Edwardsiella tarda antigen in two forms: Subunit vaccine vs DNA vaccine. Vaccine 2011, 29, 2051–2057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Sun, Y.; Liu, C.-S.; Sun, L. Construction and analysis of the immune effect of an Edwardsiella tarda DNA vaccine encoding a D15-like surface antigen. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2011, 30, 273–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Sun, Y.; Liu, C.-S.; Sun, L. Identification of an Edwardsiella tarda surface antigen and analysis of its immunoprotective potential as a purified recombinant subunit vaccine and a surface-anchored subunit vaccine expressed by a fish commensal strain. Vaccine 2010, 28, 6603–6608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Sun, Y.; Liu, C.-S.; Sun, L. Isolation and analysis of the vaccine potential of an attenuated Edwardsiella tarda strain. Vaccine 2010, 28, 6344–6350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Yang, D.; Liu, Q.; Ni, C.; Li, S.; Wu, H.; Wang, Q.; Xiao, J.; Zhang, Y. Gene expression profiling in live attenuated Edwardsiella tarda vaccine immunized and challenged zebrafish: Insights into the basic mechanisms of protection seen in immunized fish. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2013, 40, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Yang, D.; Liu, Q.; Yang, M.; Wu, H.; Wang, Q.; Xiao, J.; Zhang, Y. RNA-seq liver transcriptome analysis reveals an activated MHC-I pathway and an inhibited MHC-II pathway at the early stage of vaccine immunization in zebrafish. BMC Genom. 2012, 13, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Liu, F.; Tang, X.; Sheng, X.; Xing, J.; Zhan, W. Edwardsiella tarda outer membrane protein C: An immunogenic protein induces highly protective effects in flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) against Edwardsiellosis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2016, 17, 1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Kumar, G.; Rathore, G.; El-Matbouli, M. Outer membrane protein assembly factor YaeT (omp85) and GroEL proteins of Edwardsiella tarda are immunogenic antigens for Labeo rohita (Hamilton). J. Fish Dis. 2014, 37, 1055–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Khushiramani, R.M.; Maiti, B.; Shekar, M.; Girisha, S.K.; Akash, N.; Deepanjali, A.; Karunasagar, I.; Karunasagar, I. Recombinant Aeromonas hydrophila outer membrane protein 48 (Omp48) induces a protective immune response against Aeromonas hydrophila and Edwardsiella tarda. Res. Microbiol. 2012, 163, 286–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Yu, J.E.; Yoo, A.Y.; Choi, K.-H.; Cha, J.; Kwak, I.; Kang, H.Y. Identification of antigenic Edwardsiella tarda surface proteins and their role in pathogenesis. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2013, 34, 673–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Jiao, X.-D.; Zhang, M.; Hu, Y.-H.; Sun, L. Construction and evaluation of DNA vaccines encoding Edwardsiella tarda antigens. Vaccine 2009, 27, 5195–5202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Maiti, B.; Shetty, M.; Shekar, M.; Karunasagar, I.; Karunasagar, I. Recombinant outer membrane protein A (OmpA) of Edwardsiella tarda, a potential vaccine candidate for fish, common carp. Microbiol. Res. 2011, 167, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Jiao, X.-D.; Zhang, M.; Cheng, S.; Sun, L. Analysis of Edwardsiella tarda DegP, a serine protease and a protective immunogen. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2010, 28, 672–677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Dubey, S.; Avadhani, K.; Mutalik, S.; Sivadasan, S.M.; Maiti, B.; Girisha, S.K.; Venugopal, M.N.; Mutoloki, S.; Evensen, Ø.; Karunasagar, I. Edwardsiella tarda OmpA encapsulated in chitosan nanoparticles shows superior protection over inactivated whole cell vaccine in orally vaccinated fringed-lipped peninsula carp (Labeo fimbriatus). Vaccines 2016, 4, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Salonius, K.; Siderakis, C.; MacKinnon, A.; Griffiths, S. Use of Arthrobacter davidanieli as a Live Vaccine Against. Dev Biol. 2005, 121, 189–197. [Google Scholar]
  143. Rozas-Serri, M.; Peña, A.; Arriagada, G.; Enríquez, R.; Maldonado, L. Comparison of gene expression in post-smolt Atlantic salmon challenged by LF-89-like and EM-90-like Piscirickettsia salmonis isolates reveals differences in the immune response associated with pathogenicity. J. Fish Dis. 2017, 41, 539–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Tandberg, J.; Oliver, C.; Lagos, L.; Gaarder, M.; Yáñez, A.J.; Ropstad, E.; Winther-Larsen, H.C. Membrane vesicles from Piscirickettsia salmonis induce protective immunity and reduce development of salmonid rickettsial septicemia in an adult zebrafish model. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2017, 67, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Wilhelm, V.; Soza, C.; Martínez, R.; Rosemblatt, M.; Burzio, L.O.; Valenzuela, P.D. Production and immune response of recombinant Hsp60 and Hsp70 from the salmon pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. Biol. Res. 2005, 38, 69–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Wilhelm, V.; Miquel, A.; Burzio, L.O.; Rosemblatt, M.; Engel, E.; Valenzuela, S.; Parada, G.; Valenzuela, P.D. A vaccine against the salmonid pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis based on recombinant proteins. Vaccine 2006, 24, 5083–5091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Wilhelm, V.; Morales, C.; Martínez, R.; Rosemblatt, M.; Burzio, L.O.; Valenzuela, P.D. Isolation and expression of the genes coding for the membrane bound transglycosylase B (MltB) and the transferrin binding protein B (TbpB) of the salmon pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. Biologica. Res. 2004, 37, 783–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Marshall, S.H.; Conejeros, P.; Zahr, M.; Olivares, J.; Gómez, F.; Cataldo, P.; Henríquez, V. Immunological characterization of a bacterial protein isolated from salmonid fish naturally infected with Piscirickettsia salmonis. Vaccine 2007, 25, 2095–2102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Kuzyk, M.A.; Burian, J.; Machander, D.; Dolhaine, D.; Cameron, S.; Thornton, J.C.; Kay, W.W. An efficacious recombinant subunit vaccine against the salmonid rickettsial pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. Vaccine 2001, 19, 2337–2344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Kuzyk, M.A.; Burian, J.; Thornton, J.C.; Kay, W.W. OspA, a lipoprotein antigen of the obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis. J. Mol. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2001, 3, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  151. Tinsley, J.W.; Lyndon, A.R.; Austin, B. Antigenic and cross-protection studies of biotype 1 and biotype 2 isolates of Yersinia ruckeri in rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum). J. Appl. Microbiol. 2011, 111, 8–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Fernandez, L.; Lopez, J.; Secades, P.; Menendez, A.; Marquez, I.; Guijarro, J. In vitro and in vivo studies of the Yrp1 protease from Yersinia ruckeri and its role in protective immunity against enteric red mouth disease of salmonids. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 7328–7335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Brudal, E.; Lampe, E.O.; Reubsaet, L.; Roos, N.; Hegna, I.K.; Thrane, I.M.; Koppang, E.O.; Winther-Larsen, H.C. Vaccination with outer membrane vesicles from Francisella noatunensis reduces development of francisellosis in a zebrafish model. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2015, 42, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Lagos, L.; Tandberg, J.I.; Repnik, U.; Boysen, P.; Ropstad, E.; Varkey, D.; Paulsen, I.T.; Winther-Larsen, H.C. Characterization and vaccine potential of membrane vesicles produced by Francisella noatunensis subsp. orientalis in an adult zebrafish model. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. 2017, 24, e00557-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Li, L.; Lin, S.L.; Deng, L.; Liu, Z.G. Potential use of chitosan nanoparticles for oral delivery of DNA vaccine in black seabream Acanthopagrus schlegelii Bleeker to protect from Vibrio parahaemolyticus. J. Fish Dis. 2013, 36, 987–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Mao, Z.; Yu, L.; You, Z.; Wei, Y.; Liu, Y. Cloning, expression and immunogenicty analysis of five outer membrane proteins of Vibrio parahaemolyticus ZJ2003. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2007, 23, 567–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Liu, R.; Chen, J.; Li, K.; Zhang, X. Identification and evaluation as a DNA vaccine candidate of a virulence-associated serine protease from a pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolate. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2011, 30, 1241–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Pasnik, D.J.; Smith, S.A. Immunogenic and protective effects of a DNA vaccine for Mycobacterium marinum in fish. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2005, 103, 195–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  159. Gudding, R.; Goodrich, T. The history of fish vaccination. Fish Vaccin. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Titball, R.W. Vaccines against intracellular bacterial pathogens. Drug Discov. Today 2008, 13, 596–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  161. Park, S.B.; Aoki, T.; Jung, T.S. Pathogenesis of and strategies for preventing Edwardsiella tarda infection in fish. Vet. Res. 2012, 43, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Yamasaki, M.; Araki, K.; Nakanishi, T.; Nakayasu, C.; Yoshiura, Y.; Iida, T.; Yamamoto, A. Adaptive immune response to Edwardsiella tarda infection in ginbuna crucian carp, Carassius auratus langsdorfii. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2013, 153, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Cossarini-Dunier, M. Protection against enteric redmouth disease in rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri Richardson, after vaccination with Yersinia ruckeri bacterin. J. Fish Dis. 1986, 9, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Raida, M.K.; Buchmann, K. Bath vaccination of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum) against Yersinia ruckeri: Effects of temperature on protection and gene expression. Vaccine 2008, 26, 1050–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Stride, M.; Polkinghorne, A.; Nowak, B. Chlamydial infections of fish: Diverse pathogens and emerging causes of disease in aquaculture species. Vet. Microbiol. 2014, 170, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Tobback, E.; Decostere, A.; Hermans, K.; Van Den Broeck, W.; Haesebrouck, F.; Chiers, K. In vitro markers for virulence in Yersinia ruckeri. J. Fish Dis. 2010, 33, 197–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Menanteau-Ledouble, S.; Lawrence, M.L.; El-Matbouli, M. Invasion and replication of Yersinia ruckeri in fish cell cultures. BMC Vet. Res. 2018, 14, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Tatner, M.F.; Horne, M. The effects of vaccine dilution, length of immersion time, and booster vaccinations on the protection levels induced by direct immersion vaccination of brown trout, Salmo trutta, with Yersinia ruckeri (ERM) vaccine. Aquaculture 1985, 46, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Food and Agriculture Organization. The State of the World Fisheris and Aquaculture, Opportunities and Challenges; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  170. Moore, L.; Somamoto, T.; Lie, K.; Dijkstra, J.; Hordvik, I. Characterisation of salmon and trout CD8α and CD8β. Mol. Immunol. 2005, 42, 1225–1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  171. Partula, S.; Fellah, J.; Charlemagne, J. Characterization of cDNA of T-cell receptor beta chain in rainbow trout. C. R. Acad. Sci. 1994, 317, 765–770. [Google Scholar]
  172. Munang’andu, H.M.; Fredriksen, B.N.; Mutoloki, S.; Dalmo, R.A.; Evensen, Ø. The kinetics of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell gene expression correlate with protection in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L) vaccinated against infectious pancreatic necrosis. Vaccine 2013, 31, 1956–1963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Munang’andu, H.M.; Mutoloki, S.; Evensen, Ø. Acquired immunity and vaccination against infectious pancreatic necrosis virus of salmon. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2014, 43, 184–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Xu, C.; Evensen, Ø.; Munang’andu, H.M. De novo assembly and transcriptome analysis of Atlantic salmon macrophage/dendritic-like to cells following type I IFN treatment and Salmonid alphavirus subtype-3 infection. BMC Genom. 2015, 16, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  175. Xu, C.; Evensen, Ø.; Munang’andu, H.M. A de novo transcriptome analysis shows that modulation of the JAK-STAT signaling pathway by salmonid αvirus subtype 3 favors virus replication in macrophage/dendritic-like TO-cells. BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Xu, C.; Evensen, Ø.; Munang’andu, H.M. De novo transcriptome analysis shows that SAV-3 infection upregulates pattern recognition receptors of the endosomal toll-like and RIG-I-Like receptor signaling pathways in macrophage/dendritic like TO-cells. Viruses 2016, 8, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  177. Munang’andu, H.M.; Evensen, Ø. Current Advances in Functional Genomics in Aquaculture. In Applications of RNA-Seq and Omics Strategies-from Microorganisms to Human Health; Marchi., F.A., Elvis, C., Eds.; InTech: Hongkong, China, 2017; p. 41. [Google Scholar]
  178. Munang’andu, H.M.; Fredriksen, B.N.; Mutoloki, S.; Brudeseth, B.; Kuo, T.-Y.; Marjara, I.S.; Dalmo, R.A.; Evensen, Ø. Comparison of vaccine efficacy for different antigen delivery systems for infectious pancreatic necrosis virus vaccines in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in a cohabitation challenge model. Vaccine 2012, 30, 4007–4016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Munang’andu, H.M.; Fredriksen, B.N.; Mutoloki, S.; Dalmo, R.A.; Evensen, Ø. Antigen dose and humoral immune response correspond with protection for inactivated infectious pancreatic necrosis virus vaccines in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). Vet. Res. 2013, 44, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  180. Munang’andu, H.M.; Mutoloki, S.; Evensen, Ø. An overview of challenges limiting the design of protective mucosal vaccines for finfish. Front. Immunol. 2015, 6, 542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  181. Munang’andu, H.M.; Mutoloki, S.; Evensen, Ø. Non-replicating Vaccines. Fish Vaccin. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Munang’andu, H.M.; Mutoloki, S.; Evensen, Ø. A review of the immunological mechanisms following mucosal vaccination of finfish. Front. Immunol. 2015, 6, 427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  183. Mutoloki, S.; Munang’andu, H.M.; Evensen, Ø. Oral vaccination of fish-antigen preparations, uptake, and immune induction. Front. Immunol. 2015, 6, 519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  184. Rodrigues, A.; Hirsch, D.; Figueiredo, H.; Logato, P.; Moraes, A. Production and characterisation of alginate microparticles incorporating Aeromonas hydrophila designed for fish oral vaccination. Process Biochem. 2006, 41, 638–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Xu, Z.; Parra, D.; Gómez, D.; Salinas, I.; Zhang, Y.-A.; von Gersdorff Jørgensen, L.; Heinecke, R.D.; Buchmann, K.; LaPatra, S.; Sunyer, J.O. Teleost skin, an ancient mucosal surface that elicits gut-like immune responses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 13097–13102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table
Table 1. Intracellular bacteria species characterized in fish.
Table 1. Intracellular bacteria species characterized in fish.
BacteriaHost speciesReferences
Piscirikettsia salmonisSalmonids[21,22,23,24]
Edwardsiella tardaVarious species[25,26,27,28,29,30]
Edwardsiella ictaruliVarious species[31]
Yersinia ruckeriVarious species[14,15]
Francisella noatunensis subsp. OrientalisChichilds and other warm water species[32,33]
Francisella noatunensis subsp. noatunensisAtlantic cod (Gadus morhua)
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L)		[34,35,36]
Vibrio parahaemolyticusVarious species[37]
Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicidaVarious species[38,39]
Candidatus piscichlamydia salmonisSalmonids[40,41,42]
Mycobacterium marinumVarious species[43,44]
Mycobacterium chelonaesalmonids[45]
Mycobacterium gordonaeVarious species[43]
Mycobacterium fortuitumVarious species[43]
Mycobacterium trivaleVarious species[43]
Renibacterium salmoninarumVarious species[46,47,48]
Candidatus pisciclamydia salmonisSalmonids[49]
Tasmanian Rickettsia-like organism (RLO)Salmonids[50,51]
Table
Table 2. Secretion system proteins for intracellular bacteria trafficking fish pathogens.
Table 2. Secretion system proteins for intracellular bacteria trafficking fish pathogens.
Bacteria speciesProteinAbbrReference
Edwardsiella tardaType III secretion systemT3SS[52,53]
Edwardsiella tardaType VI secretion systemT6SS[53]
Piscirikettsia salmonisType III secretion systemT3SS[54,55]
Piscirikettsia salmonisType VI secretion systemT6SS[54,55]
Edwardsiella ictaruliType III secretion systemT3SS[56]
Francisella spp.Type IV secretion systemT4SS[33,57,58]
Franciesella natunensisType IV secretion systemT4SS[59]
Vibrio parahaemolyticusType IV secretion system T3SS[60,61]
Vibrio parahaemolyticusType IV secretion system T6SS[61]
Yersinia ruckeriType I secretion system T1SS[62]
Yersinia ruckeriType II secretion system T2SS[19]
Yersinia ruckeriType III secretion system T3SS[19]
Yersinia ruckeriType IV secretion system T4SS[19]
Edwardsiella piscicidaType VI secretion systemT6SS[63]
Mycobacterium spp.Type VII secretion system (ESX1–5)T7SS[64,65]
Photobacterium damselae subsp. piscicidaType II secretion systemT7SS[66]
Candidatus Ichthyocystis sparusType II secretion systemT2SS[42,67]
Candidatus Ichthyocystis sparusType III secretion systemT3SS[42,67]
Table
Table 3. Edwardseilla tarda immunogenic proteins used in recombinant vaccine production.
Table 3. Edwardseilla tarda immunogenic proteins used in recombinant vaccine production.
ProteinFish speciesModeRef.
Outer membrane protein CJapanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)Subunit[134]
Outer membrane protein (Omp85)Rohu (Labeo rohita)Subunit[135]
Outer membrane protein (Omp45)Rohu (Labeo rohita)Subunit[136]
Outer membrane protein AJapanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)Subunit[137]
Outer membrane protein ToICJapanese flounder(Paralichthys olivaceus)Subunit[127]
Eta2Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)Subunit[128]
Eta2Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)DNA[128]
Esa1Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)DNA[129,130]
Esa1Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)Subunit[129,130]
Eta21Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)Subunit[130]
DH5alpha/pTAET21Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)live[130]
pCE18Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)DNA[138]
pEta6Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)DNA[138]
pCE6Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)DNA[138]
pCE18Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)DNA[138]
Outer membrane protein ARohu (Labeo rohita)Subunit[139]
DegPJapanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) [140]
OmpARohu (Labeo rohita)Subunit[141]
Table
Table 4. Piscirikettsia salmonis immunogenic proteins used in recombinant vaccine production.
Table 4. Piscirikettsia salmonis immunogenic proteins used in recombinant vaccine production.
ProteinFish speciesRef.
Membrane vesiclesZebrafish (Danio rerio)[144]
Heat shock proteins Hsp60 and Hsp70Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[145]
Heat shock proteins Hsp10 and Hsp16Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
Membrane bound transglycosylase B (MltB)Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[147]
Transferring binding protein B (TbpB)Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[147]
ChaPsAtlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[148]
Outer surface lipoprotein A (OspA)Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[149,150]
Slt70Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
Omp27Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
FlgFAtlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
FlgGAtlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
FlgHAtlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
FlaAAtlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)[146]
Table
Table 5. Immunogenic proteins used for recombinant vaccine production for other bacteria species.
Table 5. Immunogenic proteins used for recombinant vaccine production for other bacteria species.
Bacteria speciesFish speciesTypeRef.
Yersinia ruckeri iron regulated OmpRainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)Subunit[151]
Yersinia ruckeri Serralysin metalloprtease (Yrp1)Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)Subunit
(toxoid)		[152]
Outer membrane vesiclesZebrafish (Danio rerio)vesicles[153,154]
Vibrio parahaemolyticus OmpKSeabream (Acanthopagrus schlegelii)DNA [155]
Vibrio parahaemolyticus OmpVyellow croaker (Pseudosciaena crocea)Subunit[156]
Vibrio parahaemolyticus OmpUyellow croaker (Pseudosciaena crocea)Subunit[156]
Vibrio parahaemolyticus OmpWyellow croaker (Pseudosciaena crocea)Subunit[156]
Vibrio parahaemolyticus TolCyellow croaker (Pseudosciaena crocea)Subunit[156]
Vibrio parahaemolyticus Serine protease geneturbot (Scophthalmus maximus)DNA[157]
Mycobacterium marinum Ag85 geneHybrid striped bass (Morone saxatilis x M. chrysops)DNA[158]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Munang’andu, H.M. Intracellular Bacterial Infections: A Challenge for Developing Cellular Mediated Immunity Vaccines for Farmed Fish. Microorganisms 2018, 6, 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms6020033

AMA Style

Munang’andu HM. Intracellular Bacterial Infections: A Challenge for Developing Cellular Mediated Immunity Vaccines for Farmed Fish. Microorganisms. 2018; 6(2):33. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms6020033

Chicago/Turabian Style

Munang’andu, Hetron Mweemba. 2018. "Intracellular Bacterial Infections: A Challenge for Developing Cellular Mediated Immunity Vaccines for Farmed Fish" Microorganisms 6, no. 2: 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms6020033

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop