Next Article in Journal
Abundance, Diversity, and Function of Soil Microorganisms in Temperate Alley-Cropping Agroforestry Systems: A Review
Next Article in Special Issue
Emerging Research Topics in the Vibrionaceae and the Squid–Vibrio Symbiosis
Previous Article in Journal
Control Strategies of Clubroot Disease Caused by Plasmodiophora brassicae
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Recent Research in Cell Stress and Microbial Infection

Division of Microbiology, Department of Pathology and Microbiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo 173-8610, Japan
Microorganisms 2022, 10(3), 622; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10030622
Submission received: 4 March 2022 / Accepted: 12 March 2022 / Published: 14 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cell Stress and Microbial Infection)
Microbial infection, including bacterial, viral, fungal, and parasitic, is a common human disease leading to various cell stresses. The interaction between host and pathogen results in cellular homeostasis alterations and triggers specific cellular stress responses. In return, microorganisms can utilize factors in cellular stress responses to facilitate their infection process. This Special Issue provides a current understanding of the latest advanced findings in cellular stress and microbial infection.
Recently published articles showed that viral infection leads to changes in cellular homeostasis of the intracellular (due to the exploitation of viral protein during the virus replication process) and/or extracellular environment (resulting from hypoxemia or other organism failure, system responses against viral infections). Various kinds of cellular stresses may be found in a specific viral infection. Zika virus could induce endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress upon its infection in placental trophoblasts [1]. The SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to various cellular stresses, including ER stress, oxidative stress, and causes mitochondria dysfunction [2,3].
Functional subversion of the ER and a cause of its stress is found in viral infection and bacterial infection. Many bacterial effectors activating ER stress sensors have been discovered. Various bacteria evolving strategies to differentially activate ER stress sensors resulting in specific host cell responses have also been reported [4]. In bacterial infection, oxidative stress occurs during the host immune response by generating reactive oxygen species (ROS). Mitochondrial stress may occur, such as in the case of staphylococcal glycolysis [5]. Recent advanced findings suggest that bacteria such as Staphylococcus aureus can induce a general stress response to protect from multiple stresses, including oxidative stress, and promote tolerance of antibiotics for their survival [6].
Not only the ER stress and oxidative stress pathways are activated by bacteria and viruses, but these two have also been involved in the pathogenesis of parasites. Malaria can result in high oxidative stress in its naturally pathogenic process, either a direct result of Plasmodium infection of erythrocytes or a consequence of the host response to infection, along with ER stress [7]. ER stress has been found in other parasitic infections such as Trypanosoma or Toxoplasma [8]. In fungal infection, host oxidative stress, nitrosative stress, and responses of pathogenic fungi against these stresses to facilitate adaptation to the host have also been investigated [9].
There has been an increasing trend in research about the roles of cellular stress or proteins and components of the cellular stress response on microbial infection. One example of findings is that viruses, including the SARS-CoV-2, can utilize the glucose-regulated protein 78 involved in the unfolded protein responses in ER stress for their binding to target cells [10,11]. Another noted an enhancement of rubella infection in the first-trimester trophoblast cell lines under low glucose-induced ER stress conditions [12].
Consequently, discovering these relationships leads to promising drug development for therapy. The findings on the crosstalk of ER stress and the anti-viral activity came to a suggestion on using a combination of ER stress inhibitors and others to suppress the SARS-CoV-2 virus binding and replication in the target cells [3,13]. ER stress has also been suggested as a therapeutic target for relieving pathological damage of parasitosis [8]. In bacterial infection, ROS-based alternative antimicrobials targeting oxidative stress to mitigate the problem of antibiotic resistance have recently been suggested [14].
Recently advanced findings regarding the relationship between microbial infection and cellular stress will be discussed in this issue. Current investigations using advanced approaches with their results on the roles of cellular stresses in microbial infection, especially in viral infection and replication, will be presented. In addition, future research to clarify the mutual roles of cellular stress and microbial infection and promising therapy development will be discussed by invited leading authors and our research group.

Funding

This work was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research under the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS KAKENHI) grant number 20K08829. The funder had no role in the writing as well as the decision to publish the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Muthuraj, P.G.; Sahoo, P.K.; Kraus, M.; Bruett, T.; Annamalai, A.S.; Pattnaik, A.; Pattnaik, A.K.; Byrareddy, S.N.; Natarajan, S.K. Zika virus infection induces endoplasmic reticulum stress and apoptosis in placental trophoblasts. Cell Death Discov. 2021, 7, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Marin, R.; Pujol, F.H.; Rojas, D.; Sobrevia, L. SARS-CoV-2 infection and oxidative stress in early-onset preeclampsia. Biochim Biophys. Acta Mol. Basis Dis. 2022, 1868, 166321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Zarandi, P.K.; Zinatizadeh, M.R.; Zinatizadeh, M.; Yousefi, M.H.; Rezaei, N. Sars-cov-2: From the pathogenesis to potential anti-viral treatments. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2021, 137, 111352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Pillich, H.; Loose, M.; Zimmer, K.P.; Chakraborty, T. Diverse roles of endoplasmic reticulum stress sensors in bacterial infection. Mol. Cell Pediatr. 2016, 3, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Tomlinson, K.L.; Lung, T.W.F.; Dach, F.; Annavajhala, M.K.; Gabryszewski, S.J.; Groves, R.A.; Drikic, M.; Francoeur, N.J.; Sridhar, S.H.; Smith, M.L.; et al. Staphylococcus aureus induces an itaconate-dominated immunometabolic response that drives biofilm formation. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 1399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Ranganathan, N.; Johnson, R.; Edwards, A.M. The general stress response of staphylococcus aureus promotes tolerance of antibiotics and survival in whole human blood. Microbiology 2020, 166, 1088–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Vasquez, M.; Zuniga, M.; Rodriguez, A. Oxidative stress and pathogenesis in malaria. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 2021, 11, 768182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Peng, M.; Chen, F.; Wu, Z.; Shen, J. Endoplasmic reticulum stress, a target for drug design and drug resistance in parasitosis. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 670874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Warris, A.; Ballou, E.R. Oxidative responses and fungal infection biology. Semin Cell Dev. Biol. 2019, 89, 34–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Gonzalez-Gronow, M.; Gopal, U.; Austin, R.C.; Pizzo, S.V. Glucose-regulated protein (grp78) is an important cell surface receptor for viral invasion, cancers, and neurological disorders. IUBMB Life 2021, 73, 843–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Rayner, J.O.; Roberts, R.A.; Kim, J.; Poklepovic, A.; Roberts, J.L.; Booth, L.; Dent, P. Ar12 (osu-03012) suppresses grp78 expression and inhibits sars-cov-2 replication. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2020, 182, 114227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Trinh, Q.D.; Takada, K.; Pham, N.T.K.; Takano, C.; Namiki, T.; Ikuta, R.; Hayashida, S.; Okitsu, S.; Ushijima, H.; Komine-Aizawa, S.; et al. Enhancement of rubella virus infection in immortalized human first-trimester trophoblasts under low glucose stress conditions. Unpublished.
  13. Banerjee, A.; Czinn, S.J.; Reiter, R.J.; Blanchard, T.G. Crosstalk between endoplasmic reticulum stress and anti-viral activities: A novel therapeutic target for covid-19. Life Sci. 2020, 255, 117842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Vaishampayan, A.; Grohmann, E. Antimicrobials functioning through ros-mediated mechanisms: Current insights. Microorganisms 2021, 10, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Trinh, Q.D. Recent Research in Cell Stress and Microbial Infection. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 622. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10030622

AMA Style

Trinh QD. Recent Research in Cell Stress and Microbial Infection. Microorganisms. 2022; 10(3):622. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10030622

Chicago/Turabian Style

Trinh, Quang Duy. 2022. "Recent Research in Cell Stress and Microbial Infection" Microorganisms 10, no. 3: 622. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10030622

APA Style

Trinh, Q. D. (2022). Recent Research in Cell Stress and Microbial Infection. Microorganisms, 10(3), 622. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10030622

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