Monday 17 November 2014

E. huxleyi virus hitching rides on zooplankton- Yeehhhaaw

Marine viruses are known to accelerate the turnover of marine phytoplankton biomass and nutrient recycling in the oceans. Frada et al. 2014 initially recognised that natural viral dispersal rates don’t match up with the rapid viral- mediated decline of algal blooms that often cover thousands of square kilometers of the ocean’s surface. Elucidating the mechanisms that govern the increased dissemination of marine phytoplankton blooms is key for understanding viral- driven biogeochemical processes. Emiliania huxleyi, a bloom- forming cocolithophore that plays an important role in the carbon cycle, is infected and killed by the E. huxleyi virus (EhV). In this experiment, it is shown that calanoid copepods (a common zooplankton which feeds on phytoplankton) and Artemia salina (a model organism) can accumulate and mediate the transmission of viruses in more than one way. Other important discoveries were also made whilst they were investigating this.

Copepods were first collected from two bloom locations in the North Pacific, and by using PCR, >80% of the copepods micro- biomes were found to contain similar sequence composition of EhV’s. This also led to the isolation of a new infectious EhV strain- which was therefore used in the experiments. It would have been useful if the authors identified the different species of copepods so other research could then bridge off of this with the same species, but I understand that this is a time consuming and difficult task.

It was shown that EhV’s can be dispersed by detachment off copepods surfaces and/or via viral- dense fecal pellets (FP). Viruses remained viable over a period of 1 day (up to 28hrs) post-feeding on EhV infected algal cells. It was also shown that the passage through zooplankton (A. salina cultured in the lab) guts actually prolonged EhV’s half-life of infectivity by 35%, relative to free virions in seawater, potentially enhancing viral transmission. From these results the authors proposed that zooplankton, swimming through topographically adjacent phytoplankton micro-patches and migrating daily over large areas across physically separated water masses can serve as viral vectors, boosting host to virus contact rates and potentially accelerating the demise of biologically important phytoplankton blooms. They also proposed that the infection via grazers will be most pronounced at the initiation phase of a bloom, where host-cell densities are low and effective contact rates are highly constrained. I personally can’t get my head around that zooplankton can travel far enough in a day to another adjacent phytoplankton bloom, but it has been previously shown that zooplankton can swim at speeds of tens of millimetres per second- so it can be achieved. 

It is likely that zooplankton are following the scent trails of diffused info chemicals to encourage them to migrate between algal patches. If we can find a way to detect these phytoplankton info chemicals, there is potential to be able to predict the spread and direction of virus infections.

What I found most interesting about this paper was the discovery that the half -life of the virus increased when transported through A. salina’s gut. This could be due to the FP coating against light exposure and dissolved enzymes or other chemicals, as these factors can dramatically reduce viral infectivity. This paper has highlighted that there is a research gap in studying how marine viruses are transported other than physical processes and the phenomenon witnessed here is likely to be generalised to other microbial groups at sea, however research is needed to confirm this. There has been various research linking climate change factors to a potential change in microbe diversity, abilities and densities in the worlds oceans, so to determine how viruses will be transferred in the future it is important to look at other viruses and zooplankton and linking with previous climatic research.

Frada, M. J., Schatz, D., Farstey, V., Ossolinski, J. E., Sabanay, H., Ben-Dor, S.,  & Vardi, A. (2014). Zooplankton May Serve as Transmission Vectors for Viruses Infecting Algal Blooms in the Ocean. Current Biology 24, 2592-2597. 


A Pdf. version was kindly given to me by the authors.

8 comments:

  1. Hey,
    Really interesting about the half life of the virus increasing once it has passed through the gut of the copepod, kind of similar example is the plant species that died out when the dodo got wiped out because the seed of the plant could only germinate once it passed through the dodo gut! Shows the fragile balance the life (not life for virus) hangs in!!
    You also mentioned that zooplankton may be following a scent trail, I think this is definitely a plausible explanation as to how zooplankton locate blooms. It has certainly been documented in freshwater systems for gastropods.
    Previous research addressing predator prey cues must have some methodology that could be used. Remember Mark Briffas lecture in second year on the Neris diversicolour!!
    Here is the link to the paper for a fresh water system.
    Fink, P., von Elert, E., & Jüttner, F. (2006). Volatile foraging kairomones in the littoral zone: attraction of an herbivorous freshwater gastropod to algal odors. Journal of chemical ecology, 32(9), 1867-1881.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Kat,

    Thankyou for the enthusiastic comment! :) Thats very interesting about the dodo- thats quite worrying really knowing the way we treat the planet what other species are being indirectly severely disrupted after we are over exploited. Yes, I do remember this. Thats a good link you make with predator prey cues- it is easy to forget this applies to algae aswell. I will give the paper a read- thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Elyssa,

    Thanks for the really interesting post, its fascinating that the viruses can increase their half life just by passing through the zooplankton. I was wondering if you think the viruses will have any effect, good or bad, on the individual copepods? Have you also found any evidence of copepods using info chemical to find a food source?

    Freya

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Elyssa et al. - DMSP is released in huge quantities by leakage from algae and during viral lysis. Could DMS or some other product of DMSP degradation be involved? We know that DMS attracts seabirds, fish, seals etc. Do the authors mention this?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Firstly Freya, thankyou for your comment :)
    Yes, its odd isn't it- I remember learning in Murray Brown's lectures last year that gamete viability of a coastal algae is enhanced after it has gone through an animals digestive system- kind of similar! That is an interesting question actually, it might be possible that the copepods benefit from transporting the virus? I have a feeling it may just be coincidental though. Would be interesting to look into. It has been shown that diatoms do release info chemicals and zooplankton use these, some of which can even show the grazer the quality of the algae and some show that the algae is 'wounded'! I have not found any direct studies on copepods and diatoms though :) Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  6. Colin, the authors did not mention this- however this needs to be considered. DMS has been shown to stimulate the foraging behaviours in copepods (Steinke et al., 2006). The release of DMS can be triggered when when phytoplankton (including E. huxleyi) are grazed on by micro-zooplankton which then attracts copepods. This could be happening in the open oceans, and this could be why the copepods are attracted to the blooms. DMS can even act as a grazing deterrent though (Strom et al. 2003)! I actually found a quite interesting take which is that the release of grazing-induced info-chemicals increases the susceptibility of micro-zooplankton to copepod predation, which can then provide a grazing refuge for infochemical-producing phytoplankton. Maybe the study reviewed here missed out a key trophic level- the herbivores that graze on E. huxleyi - could these also be indirect vectors of the virus?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Elyssa great post, thanks for mentioning it in the seminar.

    I was wondering, due to climate change it may be that changes in animal vector distribution occur causing changes in the range of certain pathogens e.g. mosquitoes and malaria. Do the authors think that changes in climate could cause changes in the distribution of certain strains of phages due to shifts in zooplankton distributions?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Tom, no the authors do not mention climate change implications however you have just highlighted how marine studies can open eyes to more important terrestrial issues hey!!! This is an interesting question you pose, as yes shifts in zooplankton could alter the distributions of viruses as zooplankton may be able to inhabit previously un inhabitable areas in the ocean (maybe it could be warmer) which then infects new phytoplankton populations! It would also be able to look at the thermal tolerance/ pH tolerance of the ehux virus!?? Has this been done before do you know!? I would fine that quite interesting to look at!

    ReplyDelete

Comments from external users are moderated before posting.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.