Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology

The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology (한국미생물·생명공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of a Probiotic Strain, Enterococcus faecium, on the Immune Responses of Olive Flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)

  • Kim, Yu-Ri (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Kim, Eun-Young (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Choi, Sun-Young (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Hossain, Muhammad Tofazzal (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Oh, Ryun-Kyoung (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Heo, Won-Seok (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Lee, Jong-Min (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University) ;
  • Cho, Young-Chai (Centre for Marine Biotechnology and Bioengineering Research, amBio Co. Ltd.) ;
  • Kong, In-Soo (Department of Biotechnology, Pukyong National University)
  • Received : 2011.08.18
  • Accepted : 2011.11.27
  • Published : 2012.04.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The present study was aimed to investigate the effect of a probiotic, Enterococcus faecium, on the immune responses against infection with the marine fish pathogen Lactococcus garvieae in olive flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus). The immune responses were assessed by lysozyme activity, complement activity, protease activity, and expression of proinflammatory cytokines by RT-PCR. The lysozyme and complement activities were increased between 9 to 15 and 9 to 13 days, respectively, and antiprotease activity was slightly elevated after 5 days of probiotic treatment. The TNF-${\alpha}$ and IL-$1{\beta}$ expressions were observed from kidney and spleen. The results of this study reveal that E. faecium induces immune-responsible materials and protects olive flounder from lactococcosis.

Keywords

References

  1. Chang, C. I. and W. Y. Lin. 2002. An evaluation of two probiotic bacterial strains, Enterococcus faecium SF68 and Bacillus toyoi, for reducing edwardsiellosis in cultured European eel, Anguilla anguilla L. J. Fish Dis. 25: 311-315. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2761.2002.00365.x
  2. Chen, D. and A. J. Ainsworth. 1992. Glucan administration potentiates immune defense mechanism of channel catfish, Ictalurus punatatus Rafinesque. J. Fish Dis. 15: 295-304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2761.1992.tb00667.x
  3. Ellis, A. E. 2001. Innate hose defense mechanisms of fish against viruses and bacteria. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 25: 827-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0145-305X(01)00038-6
  4. Engstad, R. E., B. Robertsen, and E. Frivold. 1992. Yeast glucan induces increase in activity of lysozyme and complement-mediated haemolytic activity in Atlantic salmon blood. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2: 298-297.
  5. Gatesoupe, F. J. 1999. The use of probiotics in aquaculture. Aquaculture 180: 147-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(99)00187-8
  6. Haza, A. I., A. Zabala, and P. Morales. 2004. Protective effect and cytokine production of a Lactobacillus plantarum strain isolated from ewes' milk cheese. Int. Dairy J. 14: 29-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-6946(03)00146-8
  7. Holland, M. C. H. and J. D. Lambris. 2002. The complement system in teleosts. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 12: 399-420. https://doi.org/10.1006/fsim.2001.0408
  8. Hong, G. E., D. G. Kim, E. M. Park, B. H. Nam, Y. O. Kim, and I. S. Kong. 2009. Identification of Vibrio anguillarum outer membrane vesicles related to immunostimulation in the Japanese flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 73: 437-439. https://doi.org/10.1271/bbb.80580
  9. Jolles, P. and J. Jolles. 1984. What is new in lysozyme research? Always a model system, todays as yesterday. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 63: 156-189.
  10. Jorgensen, J. B., H. Lunde, and B. Robertsen. 1993. Peritoneal and head kidney cell response to intraperitoneally injected yeast glucan in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. J. Fish Dis. 16: 313-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2761.1993.tb00865.x
  11. Kajita, Y., M. Sakai, M. Kobayashi, and H. Kawaushi. 1992. Enhancement of non-specific cytotoxic activity of leucocytes in rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss injected with growth hormone. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2: 155-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1050-4648(05)80044-0
  12. Kim, D. H. and B. Austin. 2006. Cytokine expression in leucocytes and gut cells of rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum, induced by probiotics. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 114: 297-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2006.08.015
  13. Kim, D. H. and B. Austin. 2006. Innate immune responses in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Walbaum) induced by probiotics. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 21: 513-524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2006.02.007
  14. Kim, J. H., K. S. Shin, and H. Lee. 2002. Characterization and action mode of anti-complementary substance prepared from Lactobacillus plantarum. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 34: 290-295.
  15. Kim, J. S., R. Harikrishnan, M. C. Kim, C. Balasundaram, and M. S. Heo. 2010. Dietary administration of Zooshikella sp. enhance the innate immune response and disease resistance of Paralichthys olivaceus against Streptococcus iniae. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 29: 104-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2010.02.022
  16. Lee, D. C., J. I. Lee, C. I. Park, and S. I. Park. 2001. The study on the causal agent of streptococcicosis (Lactococcus garvieae), isolated from cultured marine fishes. J. Fish Pathol. 14: 71-80.
  17. Magnadóttir, B. 2006. Innate immunity of fish (overview). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 20: 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2004.09.006
  18. Min, E. Y., T. S. Kim, and J. C. Kang. 2010. Dietary effects of lactic acid bacteria on growth, hematological and immune response of grey mullet Mugil cephalus. J. Fish Pathol. 23: 343-355.
  19. Panigrahi, A., V. Kiron, T. Kobayashi, J. Puangkaew, S. Satoh, and H. Sugita. 2004. Immune response in rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss induced by a potential probiotic bacteria Lactobacillus rhamnosus JCM 1136. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 102: 379-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2004.08.006
  20. Pirarat, N., T. Kobayashi, T. Katagiri, M. Maita, and M. Endo. 2006. Protective effects and mechanisms of a probiotic bacterium Lactobacillus rhamnosus against experimental Edwardsiella tarda infection in tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 113: 339-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2006.06.003
  21. Rao, Y. V., B. K. Das, P. Jyotyrmayee, and R. Chakrabarti. 2006. Effect of Achyranthes aspera on the immunity and survival of Labeo rohita infected with Aeromonas hydrophila. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 20: 263-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2005.04.006
  22. Sharifuzzaman, S. M. and B. Austin. 2009. Influence of probiotic feeding duration on disease resistance and immune parameters in rainbow trout. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 27: 440-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2009.06.010
  23. Smith, P., M. P. Hiney, and O. B. Samuelsen. 1994. Bacterial resistance to antimicrobial agents used in fish farming: A critical evaluation of method and meaning. Annu. Rev. Fish Dis. 4: 273-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-8030(94)90032-9
  24. Vendrell, D., J. L. Balcazar, I. Ruiz-Zarzuela, I. de Blas, O. Girones, and J. L. Muzquiz. 2006. Lactococcus garvieae in fish: A review. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. 29: 177-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cimid.2006.06.003
  25. Yano, T., R. E. P. Mangindaan, and H. Matsuyama. 1991. Enhancement of the resistance of carp Cyprinus carpio to experimental Edwardsiella tarda infection, by some ${\beta}$-1,3 glucans. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi 55: 1815-1819.

Cited by

  1. Bacterial symbiosis in the fish gut and its role in health and metabolism vol.72, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13199-016-0441-8
  2. Lactic Acid Bacteria in Finfish—An Update vol.9, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01818
  3. Effects of Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis I2 with β-Glucooligosaccharides on Growth, Innate Immunity and Streptococcosis Resistance in Olive Flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) vol.28, pp.9, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.1805.05011
  4. Enterococcus faecium as potential probiotic for ornamental neotropical cichlid fish, Pterophyllum scalare (Schultze, 1823) vol.27, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-019-00339-9
  5. Dietary supplementation of Streptococcus faecalis benefits the feed utilization, antioxidant capability, innate immunity, and disease resistance of blunt snout bream (Megalobrama amblycephala) vol.45, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10695-018-0595-9
  6. Effect of dietary supplementation with a synbiotic (Lacto Forte) on growth performance, haematological and histological profiles, the innate immune response and resistance to bacterial disease in Oreo vol.50, pp.9, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1111/are.14212
  7. Effects of Immunostimulants, Prebiotics, Probiotics, Synbiotics, and Potentially Immunoreactive Feed Additives on Olive Flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus): A Review vol.27, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2019.1622510
  8. Horizontal transfer of vanA between probiotic Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis in fermented soybean meal and in digestive tract of growing pigs vol.10, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-019-0341-x
  9. Effect of Jasonia glutinosa on immune and oxidative status of gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata L.) vol.100, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2020.02.068
  10. Effects of dietary probiotic supplements on growth, digestive enzymes activity, intestinal histomorphology and innate immunity of common carp (Cyprinus carpio): a field study vol.549, pp.None, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737787