MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>Giardia</i> extracellular vesicles disrupt intestinal epithelial junctions and inhibit the growth of commensal bacteria while increasing their swimming motility

2020· article· en· W3016901615 on OpenAlexaff
Affan Siddiq, Thibault Allain, George Dong, Martin Olivier, André G. Buret

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobiologyGiardiaBiologyIntestinal epitheliumEnterococcus faecalisMotilityBacteriaEpitheliumExtracellularIntestinal mucosaCell biologyStaphylococcus aureus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have emerged as important mediators of host‐parasite interactions. The protozoan parasite Giardia duodenalis , the most common cause of parasitic diarrheal diseases worldwide, produces EVs in response to changes in the environment. The exact role of EVs in the pathogenesis of giardiasis remains unclear. In this study, we investigate the effects of EVs on the intestinal barrier such as the intestinal epithelium and the gut commensal bacteria. Disruption of the intestinal barrier has been implicated in the development of post‐giardiasis gut disorders and EVs may represent a novel mechanism of this disruption. Aims The aim of this research is to characterize Giardia EVs and investigate their effect on the host epithelium and commensal gut bacteria. Methods G. duodenalis (isolate NF) trophozoites were either incubated with 10X bile for 1 hour or left untreated and EVs were isolated using Qiagen Exo‐Easy Maxi Kit. The concentration and size of EVs were assessed using Nanosight track analysis (NTA). Proteomic analysis of EVs was conducted using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. The effects of Giardia EVs on the host epithelium were assessed by exposing epithelial primary cell line (SCBN) to EVs for 24 hours and examining the tight junction proteins ZO‐1 and claudin‐4 by fluorescence microscopy. Antibacterial effect of Giardia EVs was assessed on gut commensals such as Escherichia coli strain HB101 and strain K12, Enterobacter cloacae (human isolate) and Enterococcus faecalis (human isolate) by measuring bacterial kinetic growth for 12 hours. Swimming motility of non‐invasive commensals was assessed on 0.3% agar after incubating with EVs for 24 hours and the halo sizes were measured as a marker of swimming behavior. Results Our findings indicate that bile treated Giardia trophozoites produce more EVs as compared to untreated trophozoites. NTA revealed that Giardia EVs range around 200 nm. Proteomic analysis of EVs revealed the presence of well characterized Giardia virulence factors such as cysteine proteases, tenascins, oxidative defense enzymes, variant surface proteins as well as metabolic enzymes such as arginine deaminase and ornithine carbamoyl transferase. Additionally, exposure of SCBN cells to EVs resulted in the disruption and/or rearrangement of tight junction proteins Zo‐1 and Claudin‐4. Moreover, our results also indicate that Giardia EVs exert bacteriostatic effects on E. coli strains HB101, K12, E. cloacae and E. faecalis. Finally, Giardia EVs also significantly increased the swimming motility of non‐invasive commensals E. coli strain HB101 and E. cloacae . Conclusion Our research highlights a novel mechanism of Giardia’s interaction with the intestinal barrier. Giardia EVs contain virulence factors that disrupt the host’s intestinal epithelium and modify the growth and motility of commensal bacteria. These effects may have significant implications in disease pathophysiology. Support or Funding Information Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207