scholarly journals Similarities between decapod and insect neuropeptidomes

PeerJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. e2043 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan A. Veenstra
Keyword(s):  
Procambarus Clarkii ◽  
Carcinus Maenas ◽  
Macrobrachium Rosenbergii ◽  
Homarus Americanus ◽  
Eriocheir Sinensis ◽  
Insect Species ◽  
Cdna Libraries ◽  
Scylla Paramamosain ◽  
Dna Assembly ◽  
Physiological Processes

Background.Neuropeptides are important regulators of physiological processes and behavior. Although they tend to be generally well conserved, recent results using trancriptome sequencing on decapod crustaceans give the impression of significant differences between species, raising the question whether such differences are real or artefacts.Methods.The BLAST+ program was used to find short reads coding neuropeptides and neurohormons in publicly available short read archives. Such reads were then used to find similar reads in the same archives, and the DNA assembly program Trinity was employed to construct contigs encoding the neuropeptide precursors as completely as possible.Results.The seven decapod species analyzed in this fashion, the crabsEriocheir sinensis, Carcinus maenasandScylla paramamosain, the shrimpLitopenaeus vannamei, the lobsterHomarus americanus, the fresh water prawnMacrobrachium rosenbergiiand the crayfishProcambarus clarkiihad remarkably similar neuropeptidomes. Although some neuropeptide precursors could not be assembled, in many cases individual reads pertaining to the missing precursors show unambiguously that these neuropeptides are present in these species. In other cases, the tissues that express those neuropeptides were not used in the construction of the cDNA libraries. One novel neuropeptide was identified: elongated PDH (pigment dispersing hormone), a variation on PDH that has a two-amino-acid insertion in its core sequence. Hyrg is another peptide that is ubiquitously present in decapods and is likely a novel neuropeptide precursor.Discussion.Many insect species have lost one or more neuropeptide genes, but apart from elongated PDH and hyrg all other decapod neuropeptides are present in at least some insect species, and allatotropin is the only insect neuropeptide missing from decapods. This strong similarity between insect and decapod neuropeptidomes makes it possible to predict the receptors for decapod neuropeptides that have been deorphanized in insects. This includes the androgenic insulin-like peptide that seems to be homologous to drosophila insulin-like peptide 8.

scholarly journals Similarities between decapod and insect neuropeptidomes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan A Veenstra
Keyword(s):  
Procambarus Clarkii ◽  
Carcinus Maenas ◽  
Macrobrachium Rosenbergii ◽  
Homarus Americanus ◽  
Eriocheir Sinensis ◽  
Insect Species ◽  
Cdna Libraries ◽  
Scylla Paramamosain ◽  
Dna Assembly ◽  
Physiological Processes

Background. Neuropeptides are important regulators of physiological processes and behavior. Although they tend to be generally well conserved, recent results using trancriptome sequencing on decapod crustaceans give the impression of significant differences between species, raising the question whether such differences are real or artefacts. Methods. The BLAST+ program was used to find short reads coding neuropeptides and neurohormons in publicly available short read archives. Such reads were then used to find similar reads in the same archives and the DNA assembly program Trinity was employed to construct contigs encoding the neuropeptide precursors as completely as possible. Results. The seven decapod species analyzed in this fashion, the crabs Eriocheir sinensis, Carcinus maenas and Scylla paramamosain, the shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei, the lobster Homarus americanus, the fresh water prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii and the crayfish Procambarus clarkii had remarkably similar neuropeptidomes. Although some neuropeptide precursors could not be assembled, in many cases individual reads pertaining to the missing precursors show unambiguously that these neuropeptides are present in these species. In other cases the tissues that express those neuropeptides were not used in the construction of the cDNA libraries. One novel neuropeptide was identified, elongated PDH (pigment dispersing hormone), a variation on PDH that has a two amino acid insertion in its core sequence. Hyrg is another peptide that is ubiquitously present in decapods and is likely a novel neuropeptide precursor. Discussion. Many insect species have lost one or more neuropeptide genes, but apart from elongated PDH and hyrg all other decapod neuropeptides are present in at least some insect species and allatotropin is the only insect neuropeptide missing from decapods. This strong similarity between insect and decapod neuropeptidomes makes it possible to predict the receptors for decapod neuropeptides that have been deorphanized in insects. This includes the androgenic insulin like peptide that seems to be homologous to drosophila insulin-like peptide 8.

scholarly journals Similarities between decapod and insect neuropeptidomes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan A Veenstra
Keyword(s):  
Procambarus Clarkii ◽  
Carcinus Maenas ◽  
Macrobrachium Rosenbergii ◽  
Homarus Americanus ◽  
Eriocheir Sinensis ◽  
Insect Species ◽  
Cdna Libraries ◽  
Scylla Paramamosain ◽  
Dna Assembly ◽  
Physiological Processes

Background. Neuropeptides are important regulators of physiological processes and behavior. Although they tend to be generally well conserved, recent results using trancriptome sequencing on decapod crustaceans give the impression of significant differences between species, raising the question whether such differences are real or artefacts. Methods. The BLAST+ program was used to find short reads coding neuropeptides and neurohormons in publicly available short read archives. Such reads were then used to find similar reads in the same archives and the DNA assembly program Trinity was employed to construct contigs encoding the neuropeptide precursors as completely as possible. Results. The seven decapod species analyzed in this fashion, the crabs Eriocheir sinensis, Carcinus maenas and Scylla paramamosain, the shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei, the lobster Homarus americanus, the fresh water prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii and the crayfish Procambarus clarkii had remarkably similar neuropeptidomes. Although some neuropeptide precursors could not be assembled, in many cases individual reads pertaining to the missing precursors show unambiguously that these neuropeptides are present in these species. In other cases the tissues that express those neuropeptides were not used in the construction of the cDNA libraries. One novel neuropeptide was identified, elongated PDH (pigment dispersing hormone), a variation on PDH that has a two amino acid insertion in its core sequence. Hyrg is another peptide that is ubiquitously present in decapods and is likely a novel neuropeptide precursor. Discussion. Many insect species have lost one or more neuropeptide genes, but apart from elongated PDH and hyrg all other decapod neuropeptides are present in at least some insect species and allatotropin is the only insect neuropeptide missing from decapods. This strong similarity between insect and decapod neuropeptidomes makes it possible to predict the receptors for decapod neuropeptides that have been deorphanized in insects. This includes the androgenic insulin like peptide that seems to be homologous to drosophila insulin-like peptide 8.

scholarly journals LARGE EPIBENTHIC INVERTEBRATES IN THE BRAS D’OR LAKES

2002 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. John Tremblay
Keyword(s):  
Egg Production ◽  
Carcinus Maenas ◽  
Homarus Americanus ◽  
Strongylocentrotus Droebachiensis ◽  
Green Crab ◽  
American Lobster ◽  
Placopecten Magellanicus ◽  
Cancer Irroratus ◽  
Trawl Surveys ◽  
Epibenthic Invertebrates

The distribution of large epibenthic invertebrates (lobster and crabs, bivalve molluscs and echinoderms) in the Bras d’Or Lakes is reviewed, and possible limiting factors are identified. The review is based on published and unpublished studies, including recent trawl surveys directed at fish, and trapping studies directed at American lobster Homarus americanus and green crab Carcinus maenas. The reduced salinities within the Lakes probably limit the distribution of several species (rock crab Cancer irroratus, sea scallop Placopecten magellanicus and possibly American lobster), particularly during the more sensitive larval period. Lobsters and eastern oysters Crassostrea virginica serve to illustrate the multiple factors limiting epibenthic invertebrate distribution within the Bras d’Or Lakes. Lobsters are less abundant within the Bras d’Or Lakes than on the outer coast of Cape Breton Island. Possible reasons are the reduced salinity and limited cobble bottom substrate in the Bras d’Or Lakes, coupled with low food availability and low egg production. Low egg production may be the result of overfishing of lobsters in the past. The life history and physiology of the eastern oyster appears to be well suited to the areas of the Lakes with warm summer temperatures. The oyster populations in the Bras d’Or Lakes are limited by natural predators (e.g. starfish and green crab), competitors (e.g. blue mussel Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus), and overfishing. The green crab, a new arrival to the Bras d’Or Lakes, will likely have negative effects on bivalves such as oysters, but the overall effect of green crab on the Bras d’Or Lakes food web is difficult to predict. Recent trawl surveys indicate both sea urchins Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis and starfish are present in considerable abundance, but little is known about their ecological roles in the Bras d’Or Lakes.La distribution des grands invertébrés épibenthique (les homards et les crabes, les mollusques bivalves et les échinodermes) dans les lacs du Bras d’Or est examinée et les coefficients possiblement limitatifs sont identifies. La revue est basée sur des études publiées et non-publiées englobant les plus récentesétudes sur la pêche au chalut dirigées vers les poissons et les études sur la pêche aux casiers dirigées vers les homards américains Homarus americanus et les crabes verts Carcinus maenas. Salinités réduites dans les lacs du Bras d’Or limitent probablement la distribution de quelques espèces crabes roches Cancer irroratus, pétoncle géant Placopecten magellanicus et possiblement le homard américain, en particulier, pendent l’époque sensible du larvaire. Les homards et les huîtres de l’Est Crossostrea virginica montrent plusieurs facteurs coefficients limitatifs de la distribution des invertébrés épibenthique dan les lacs du Bras d’Or. Les homards sont moins abondants ici que sur la côte extérieure de L’Ille du Cap Breton. Des explications possibles sont la réduction de l’eau saline du pavé rond limite dans le substratum de lacs, ainsi que la pauvre disponibilité de mangé et la production basse des oeufs. Cette dernière est peut-être le résultat d’un trop grand prise de homards au passè. L’histoire et la physiologie des huîtres semblent être bien adaptés aux lieux des lacs de Bras d’Or, qui ont des temperatures chaudes dan l’été. La population des huîtres dans les lacs est limitée par des proies natures ( ie étoiles de mer et les crabes verts) compétiteurs ( ie. Moules bleus Mytilus edulis et M. trossulus) et une trop grande prise de poissons. Le crabe vert, une arrivée nouvelle dans les lacs du Bras d’Or va sans doute avoir des impacts négatifs sur les bivalues comme les huîtres, mais leurs impacts en general sur la chaîne nutritive est difficile à prédire. Les études les plus recents sur la pêche au chalut montrent qu’il y a ungrand nombre d’oursins de mer Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis et des étoiles de mer, mais on ne connait pas quel est leur rôle écologique dans les lacs du Bras d’Or.

scholarly journals Mini Review: Virus Interference: History, Types and Occurrence in Crustaceans

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
César Marcial Escobedo-Bonilla
Keyword(s):  
Penaeus Monodon ◽  
Carcinus Maenas ◽  
Macrobrachium Rosenbergii ◽  
Virus Infections ◽  
Pathogenic Virus ◽  
Pathogenic Viruses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Penaeus Duorarum ◽  
De Man

Virus interference is a phenomenon in which two viruses interact within a host, affecting the outcome of infection of at least one of such viruses. The effect of this event was first observed in the XVIII century and it was first recorded even before virology was recognized as a distinct science from microbiology. Studies on virus interference were mostly done in the decades between 1930 and 1960 in viruses infecting bacteria and different vertebrates. The systems included in vivo experiments and later, more refined assays were done using tissue and cell cultures. Many viruses involved in interference are pathogenic to humans or to economically important animals. Thus the phenomenon may be relevant to medicine and to animal production due to the possibility to use it as alternative to chemical therapies against virus infections to reduce the severity of disease/mortality caused by a superinfecting virus. Virus interference is defined as the host resistance to a superinfection caused by a pathogenic virus causing obvious signs of disease and/or mortality due to the action of an interfering virus abrogating the replication of the former virus. Different degrees of inhibition of the superinfecting virus can occur. Due to the emergence of novel pathogenic viruses in recent years, virus interference has recently been revisited using different pathogens and hosts, including commercially important farmed aquatic species. Here, some highly pathogenic viruses affecting farmed crustaceans can be affected by interference with other viruses. This review presents data on the history of virus interference in hosts including bacteria and animals, with emphasis on the known cases of virus interference in crustacean hosts.Life Science Identifiers (LSIDs)Escherichia coli [(Migula 1895) Castellani & Chalmers 1919]Aedes albopictus (Skuse 1894)Liocarcinus depurator (Linnaeus 1758): urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:107387Penaeus duorarum (Burkenroad 1939): urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:158334Carcinus maenas (Linnaeus 1758): urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:107381Macrobrachium rosenbergii (De Man 1879): urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:220137Penaeus vannamei (Boone 1931): urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:C30A0A50-E309-4E24-851D-01CF94D97F23Penaeus monodon (Fabricius 1798): urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:3DD50D8B-01C2-48A7-B80D-9D9DD2E6F7ADPenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson 1874): urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:584982

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document