Skip to main content
PMC home page

This is a preprint.

It has not yet been peer reviewed by a journal.

The National Library of Medicine is running a pilot to include preprints that result from research funded by NIH in PMC and PubMed.

bioRxiv logoLink to bioRxiv
[Preprint]. 2023 Aug 28:2023.08.28.555169. [Version 1] doi: 10.1101/2023.08.28.555169

Microbe transmission from pet shop to lab-reared zebrafish reveals a pathogenic birnavirus

Marlen C Rice 1, Nels C Elde 2,3, James A Gagnon 1, Keir M Balla 2,4,#
PMCID: PMC10491165  PMID: 37693489

Abstract

Zebrafish are popular research organisms selected for laboratory use due in part to widespread availability from the pet trade. Many contemporary colonies of laboratory zebrafish are maintained in aquaculture facilities that monitor and aim to curb infections that can negatively affect colony health and confound experiments. The impact of laboratory control on the microbial constituents associated with zebrafish in research environments compared to the pet trade are unclear. Diseases of unknown causes are common in both environments. We conducted a metagenomic survey to broadly compare the zebrafish-associated microbes in pet trade and laboratory environments. We detected many microbes in animals from the pet trade that were not found in laboratory animals. Co-housing experiments revealed several transmissible microbes including a newly described non-enveloped, double-stranded RNA virus in the Birnaviridae family we name Rocky Mountain birnavirus (RMBV). Infections were detected in asymptomatic animals from the pet trade, but when transmitted to laboratory animals RMBV was associated with pronounced antiviral responses and hemorrhagic disease. These experiments highlight the pet trade as a distinct source of diverse microbes that associate with zebrafish and establish a paradigm for the discovery of newly described pathogenic viruses and other infectious microbes that can be developed for study in the laboratory.

Keywords: infection, host-microbe interactions, zebrafish, virus, parasite, metagenomics, pathogenesis

INTRODUCTION

The zebrafish is one of the most common fish maintained in aquaria and has been propagated in the pet trade since at least the early 20th century (Creaser, 1934). Accessibility is one of the driving factors that originally led biologists to adopt zebrafish as research organisms in laboratories (Creaser, 1934; Grunwald and Eisen, 2002; Parichy, 2015), and most of the laboratory lines in use today were originally derived from pet trade sources (Trevarrow and Robison, 2004). Many contemporary populations of laboratory zebrafish have been propagated in controlled housing systems for several decades under supervisory regimes that typically aim to minimize the abundance of potentially pathogenic microbes that are prevalent in pet trade environments (Collymore et al., 2016; Kent et al., 2020; Lawrence and Mason, 2012). The long-term investments in maintaining standardized research organisms might profoundly alter the types and abundances of microbes that associate with zebrafish in the laboratory relative to pet trade sources. Complicating matters, zebrafish are still occasionally imported from the pet trade into laboratory colonies (Kent et al., 2020; Silveira et al., 2021) and our knowledge of the zebrafish-associated microbes in pet trade and laboratory environments is limited.

Increasing our knowledge of the microbes that associate with zebrafish in different environments could reveal chains of microbial transmission, improve research colony health monitoring programs, and lead to the discovery of unknown infectious microbes. These studies have the potential for establishing new experimental systems for investigating infection biology with broad biomedical and aquaculture relevance. The current set of known zebrafish-associated microbes that are commonly found in laboratory environments includes stable communities of bacteria that comprise the zebrafish microbiota (Burns and Guillemin, 2017; Roeselers et al., 2011), bacterial pathogens that cause mycobacteriosis (Kent et al., 2004), parasitic nematodes and other eukaryotic pathogens such as microsporidia (Matthews et al., 2001; Norris et al., 2020), and a picornavirus distantly related to poliovirus (Altan et al., 2019; Balla et al., 2020). Few studies have investigated the zebrafish-associated microbes in pet trade environments, but recently discovered pathogens in class Trematoda and Conoidasida in pet trade zebrafish (Kent et al., 2020; Silveira et al., 2021) highlight these environments as rich sources of newly observed microbes. Histopathology and 16S rRNA sequencing are the primary tools that have been used in the detection and discovery of zebrafish-associated microbes in laboratory and pet trade environments. Identifying newly described viruses with these methods is often impossible, and other classes of microbes can also be challenging to detect. Here, we use metagenomic sequencing and co-housing experiments to survey the microbes that can inhabit and transmit between zebrafish populations in the laboratory and pet trade. We report the newly described Rocky Mountain birnavirus (RMBV) from asymptomatic pet trade zebrafish that appears highly transmissible and pathogenic in laboratory-reared zebrafish.

RESULTS

Zebrafish from the pet trade harbor known and novel microbes that are potentially pathogenic

We sampled outwardly healthy zebrafish from three different pet trade sources and a research laboratory housing system to survey microbial populations across environments through sequencing of bulk intestinal RNA. After excluding reads that mapped to the Danio rerio genome, we performed de novo assembly of transcripts and assigned prospective taxonomic classification based on nucleotide or amino acid similarity to known sequences (Supplemental files 1&2).

We classified hundreds of zebrafish-associated transcripts as viral and thousands of transcripts as prokaryotic or eukaryotic (Supplemental file 2). Many prospective virus sequences were derived from bacteriophages, while others had similarity to viruses that infect diverse eukaryotic hosts. Among the virus families that infect vertebrate hosts, we reconstructed two transcripts that constitute a full genome sequence (GenBank accession numbers OR427289 and OR427290) for a novel bisegmented double-stranded RNA virus with similarity to birnaviruses that infect fish (Fig. 1A). Phylogenetic analyses confirmed that the birnavirus we discovered, which we named Rocky Mountain birnavirus (RMBV), is part of a clade of viruses that infect fish and other vertebrates within the family Birnaviridae (Figure 1B). This clade includes infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV), which can cause severe disease and losses in aquaculture. The closest relative to RMBV in this phylogeny, Wenling jack mackerels birnavirus, shares 62% amino acid identity in the RdRp protein. Thus, RMBV is a newly described virus that appears to naturally infect zebrafish and is related to significant pathogens in aquaculture.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Metatranscriptomic survey of microbes associated with zebrafish from laboratory and pet trade sources. (A) Schematic representation of a newly discovered birnavirus associated with zebrafish in this study. Both segments of the linear dsRNA genome are depicted with boxes denoting relative positions of ORFs based on protein domain conservation. Numbers beneath segments indicate nucleotide lengths of each prospective 5’UTR, coding sequence, and 3’UTR. (B) Maximum likelihood phylogeny of viruses in the family Birnaviridae. The black dot highlights the novel zebrafish-associated virus schematized in (A), which we name Rocky Mountain birnavirus (RMBV). (C) Maximum likelihood phylogeny of RdRp protein sequences from viruses in the order Picornavirales. Black dots highlight the zebrafish-associated viruses that were detected (ZfPV) or newly discovered in this study. Trees in (A&C) are midpoint rooted. Scales are in amino acid substitutions per site. Branches are colored based on the known or inferred host group. (D) Taxonomic classification and quantification of host and microbe transcripts identified in intestinal tissues of zebrafish from laboratory and pet trade sources. Columns show estimated abundances in tissue samples from independent individuals grouped by source.

Among the other viruses with known or possible vertebrate hosts, we detected an endemic zebrafish picornavirus (ZfPV) that we and others recently discovered (Altan et al., 2019; Balla et al., 2020) and dozens of other sequences with similarity to members of the order Picornavirales. Eight of the novel sequences contained full-length RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) sequences that we used along with representative RdRp sequences across the order Picornavirales to perform phylogenetic analyses. A maximum likelihood phylogeny placed all novel picornavirus-like sequences in a clade with viruses isolated from non-vertebrate hosts (Fig. 1C), which suggests that they infect eukaryotes associated with zebrafish as opposed to zebrafish themselves.

We next estimated host and microbe abundances by mapping all reads to an integrated set of zebrafish and microbial transcripts (Fig. 1D, Supplemental File 3). ZfPV was broadly detected in zebrafish from both laboratory and pet trade sources, extending its known presence beyond the laboratory to other environments (Altan et al., 2019; Balla et al., 2020). In contrast, RMBV was only detected in zebrafish from a single pet trade source. Similarly, most of the prospective eukaryote-infecting viruses we discovered were only detected in pet trade sources. The closest match to a novel virus in phylum Negarnaviricota discovered here is Amsterdam virus (61% amino acid identity), which is associated with parasitic nematodes that infect rodents (Williams et al., 2019). Together with a pronounced abundance of nematode transcripts in the pet trade zebrafish, these observations suggest that the newly described negative-sense RNA virus infected nematodes that infected zebrafish. Parasitic worm transcripts were detected in animals from both environments but were generally more abundant in zebrafish from the pet trade, while microsporidia transcripts were abundant in both laboratory and pet trade zebrafish. Clustering samples based on the abundance of bacteria families in our data did not distinguish between their sources (Supplemental File 4), highlighting that similar bacterial communities were associated with zebrafish in laboratory and pet trade environments. These results underscore the use of zebrafish from the pet trade as potential sources of viruses and parasites that are not commonly found in laboratory zebrafish.

Transmission of RMBV from pet trade to laboratory zebrafish is associated with necrotic disease

To determine if microbes found in pet trade zebrafish could be naturally transmitted to laboratory zebrafish, we devised a cohousing experiment using closed circulation aquaria containing zebrafish from both environments (Fig. 2A). A control tank was seeded with only zebrafish from the laboratory, and a cohousing tank was seeded with zebrafish from the laboratory along with zebrafish from pet trade source 3 (Fig. 1D). All zebrafish in the control tank remained healthy throughout the experiment (Fig. 2B). In contrast, we observed hemorrhaging in three laboratory zebrafish approximately one month after cohousing them with pet trade zebrafish (Fig. 2C). At this point we collected intestines, kidneys, and spleens from control and cohoused laboratory zebrafish for RNA isolation and sequencing. The metatranscriptomes of these samples revealed pronounced levels of RMBV in all laboratory zebrafish that were cohoused with pet trade zebrafish (Fig. 2D). We detected RMBV in all tissues that were sampled, revealing that infections were systemic. No other viruses that were unique to pet trade zebrafish in our survey above (Fig 1D) were detected in cohoused laboratory zebrafish. These experiments demonstrate that viruses circulating in seemingly healthy zebrafish from the pet trade can be naturally transmitted to laboratory zebrafish and cause disease.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Overt disease observed in laboratory zebrafish co-housed with zebrafish from the pet trade is associated with RMBV infection. (A) Diagram of cohousing experiment. Tanks were seeded with adult zebrafish from the laboratory (control) or zebrafish from the laboratory and the pet trade (co-housed). (B) A representative individual from the control tank. (C) A representative laboratory zebrafish one month after co-housing with zebrafish from the pet trade. Red arrows highlight necrotic lesions. (D) Transmission of microbes from pet trade to co-housed laboratory zebrafish inferred from host and microbe transcript abundances. Three laboratory fish were sampled from each tank. Samples are grouped by tank and tissue. Columns show estimated transcript abundances in tissue samples from individual laboratory zebrafish.

Naturally transmitted RMBV infections elicit inflammatory immune responses in laboratory zebrafish

To identify host transcriptional responses to RMBV, we tested for differential gene expression in tissues from infected laboratory zebrafish compared to control laboratory zebrafish and identified more than 800 genes (at an adjusted p <0.05) that were induced by at least 2-fold (Supplemental File 5). RMBV infection was associated with elevated levels of genes related to interferon signaling, inflammation, innate immunity, and adaptive immunity (Fig. 3A). We identified an overlapping set of differentially expressed genes in all three organs, but the spleen had more virus-induced genes than infected intestine or kidney tissues (Fig. 3B and Supplemental File 5). We next compared the RMBV-induced genes to those induced in another virus infection context. Spring viremia of carp virus (SVCV) is an RNA virus naturally found in a range of fish species that can also cause hemorrhagic disease when experimentally administered to zebrafish (Sanders et al., 2003). A recent study measured gene expression in zebrafish intestine, kidney, and spleen tissues 12 hours after intraperitoneal injection with SVCV (Bai et al., 2021). Despite several differences in experimental context, more than a third of the genes that were highly induced by RMBV were also induced during infection with SVCV (Fig. 3C). We observed enrichment for antiviral defense processes among both virus-induced gene sets, enrichment for B cell activation among RMBV-induced genes, and enrichment for lymphocyte chemotaxis and other processes among SVCV-induced genes (Fig. 3D). We speculate that the divergent enrichment for lymphocyte activation and chemotaxis between RMBV- and SVCV-induced gene sets may reflect differences in the stage of infection progression, but defining the full extent of overlap between the gene sets induced by either virus will require further experimentation. These observations highlight genes associated with inflammatory disease observed during natural transmission of birnavirus infections in zebrafish.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Naturally transmitted RMBV infections induce systemic inflammatory antiviral responses in laboratory zebrafish. (A) Differential gene expression in laboratory zebrafish infected by RMBV compared to uninfected laboratory zebrafish. Average log2 fold change expression is plotted for each gene in a comparison of three RMBV-infected and three uninfected samples for each tissue. All comparisons had adjusted p-values of <0.05 unless denoted with a black circle. (B) Comparison of RMBV-induced gene sets by tissue. Euler plot includes all genes with log2 fold changes >1 and adjusted p-values <0.05. (C) Comparison of virus-induced gene sets in intestine, spleen, or kidney during RMBV or spring viremia of carp virus (SVCV) infections. Euler plot includes all genes with log2 fold changes >2 and adjusted p-values <0.05. SVCV RNAseq data are from (PMID: 34908463). (D) Enrichment of Gene Ontology biological processes among the genes that are induced with log2 fold changes >2 during RMBV or SVCV infections. All biological processes with false discovery rates of <0.05 for at least one condition are plotted.

DISCUSSION

This study presents an experimental platform for unbiased molecular detection and discovery of microbes circulating in zebrafish from different environments. We used this integrated workflow to discover a newly described naturally transmissible birnavirus that causes hemorrhagic symptoms in infected individuals. Phylogenetic analyses place Rocky Mountain birnavirus in a clade with infectious pancreatic necrosis virus, which is among the most significant threats to global aquaculture industry due to the fatal hemorrhagic disease that can result from infection (Dopazo, 2020). Survivors of IPNV infection can become lifelong carriers that transmit virus both horizontally and vertically (Wolf et al., 1963). These observations motivated the first study to use zebrafish for investigating virus infection biology, in which the authors demonstrated that IPNV can transmit to the eggs of infected adults and persist in the next generation (Seeley et al., 1977). Subsequent studies have confirmed that IPNV can infect zebrafish but does not cause observable disease (Bello-Perez et al., 2019; LaPatra et al., 2000). In contrast, we observed clear signs of hemorrhaging associated with RMBV infection in zebrafish, suggesting that this virus-host pair might better recapitulate features of disease caused by birnaviruses in aquaculture settings.

Unlike the laboratory-reared RMBV-infected zebrafish, infected zebrafish from the pet trade did not exhibit signs of disease. Studies that cohoused mice from the laboratory and the pet trade also observed disease that was restricted to the laboratory-reared cohort (Beura et al., 2016; Fay et al., 2021), which was linked to a relative deficit of microbial exposure and immune memory in laboratory mice compared to mice from the pet trade or the wild (Beura et al., 2016). The differences in disease manifestation that we observed between laboratory-reared and pet trade zebrafish infected by RMBV could result from differences in immunological life history, genetics, stage of infection, or a combination of influences. Identifying the causes of variation in birnavirus virulence is an ongoing effort in research with fish (Dopazo, 2020), birds (Zhang et al., 2022), and mammals (Yang et al., 2021). Future work aimed at isolating or synthesizing infectious RMBV would enable new avenues of research using zebrafish to resolve determinants of birnavirus infection, disease, and immunity in vertebrates.

The outcome of any infection is largely dictated by the specific pairing of host and virus genomes. IPNV was first isolated from brook trout (Wolf et al., 1960) but has since been isolated from various species of farmed and wild fish around the world (Duan et al., 2021). Disease resulting from IPNV infection in salmonids is often associated with transcriptional activation of interferon signaling, genes involved in inflammation, and the adaptive immune system (Ingerslev et al., 2009; McBeath et al., 2007; Munang’andu et al., 2014; Reyes-Cerpa et al., 2012; Tapia et al., 2022). Experimental administration of IPNV in zebrafish leads to infection without induction of interferon signaling or disease (Bello-Perez et al., 2019; LaPatra et al., 2000). We observed that naturally occurring RMBV infections in laboratory-reared zebrafish are associated with inflammatory antiviral gene expression programs and clear signs of necrotic disease. Spring viremia of carp virus infections in zebrafish also lead to necrotic disease (Sanders et al., 2003) associated with transcriptional activation of interferon signaling and inflammation (Bai et al., 2021; Pereiro et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2017). Extending these comparisons to comprehensive assessment of the transcriptional programs induced by RMBV, SVCV, and other viruses associated with inflammation along with comparisons to the gene sets induced by IPNV and other viruses that are not associated with inflammation in zebrafish will improve our understanding of why some infections result in disease while others do not.

In addition to RMBV, our metagenomic sampling of zebrafish-associated microbes provides a suite of molecular identifiers for known and newly described members of communities in laboratory and pet trade environments. The large diversity of sequences from cellular organisms included in this set makes specific host assignment challenging for some of the newly described viruses. However, phylogenetic analyses strongly support a non-vertebrate host for most virus sequences we detected. While it is not yet clear how the variety of viruses infecting non-vertebrate hosts might affect zebrafish, some of the viruses appear to hold that potential. One of the newly described negative-strand RNA viruses in our dataset is most similar to a virus associated with parasitic nematode infections in mice (Williams et al., 2019), which suggests that a nematode that infects zebrafish is the natural host. Viruses of parasites are potentially meaningful as they can alter the virulence associated with parasite-host interactions (Barrow et al., 2020). Nematode sequences were among the most abundant in our dataset, which is consistent with the known prevalence of these parasites in zebrafish in laboratory and pet trade environments (Kent et al., 2021). While nematode infections in zebrafish are well-documented by histology, our study expands the repertoire of nematode sequences that can be used to assess the health of zebrafish colonies.

We also identified hundreds of transcripts from at least one newly described species of microsporidia. Whole genome data exist for one of the two species of microsporidia that have been described in zebrafish (Sanders et al., 2012). The microsporidia sequences in our dataset may therefore derive from a parasite previously described by histological studies or from a newly described species.

Altogether, the diversity of sequences we uncovered in a sparse sampling of zebrafish from laboratory and pet trade environments suggests that additional sampling will reveal many more newly described microbes. These discoveries will expand our ability to monitor the health of zebrafish colonies and lead to new experimental opportunities for studying infection biology with a versatile research organism.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pet trade survey and cohousing assay

This study was conducted under the approval of the Office of Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC # 00001439) of the University of Utah’s animal care and use program. Nine zebrafish from three local pet trade sources in the Salt Lake valley were purchased. Fish were sacrificed and intestinal tissue harvested and processed individually for RNA extraction. Cohousing assay was set up with closed circulation aquaria using 3 identical 10-gallon tanks. Tanks were inoculated with ceramic filter rings (Aquapapa), these filters had been housed in a zebrafish research facility for 1 month previously to build up a nitrifying microbial community. Identical filtration systems were set up in each tank with activated-charcoal and sponge filters (AquaClear 50). Tanks were cycled for 6 weeks using pure ammonia (Great Value). The cohousing experiment was initiated when ammonia and nitrite levels were undetectable. Each tank housed 15 fish. Control tanks contained 15 lab-reared fish. The Laboratory samples in presented in Figure1 were collected from this control tank of lab-reared fish. Each cohousing tank housed 10 lab fish and 5 pet trade fish. Fish were fed identical diets (Zeigler, Adult Zebrafish Diet). Approximately 1 month into cohousing several lab-reared fish began exhibiting hemorrhaging. These were euthanized and processed for RNA extraction. All additional fish used in the study were subsequently sacrificed and processed within one week.

RNA extraction and sequencing

Fish were sacrificed and intestines, whole kidney marrows, and spleens were harvested for processing. All tissues were homogenized using mechanical lysis. RNA was extracted using the directzol kit (Zymo). 1ml of TRIzol was used per intestine and 0.5ml of TRIzol used for individual spleens and kidneys. Following RNA extraction, samples were DNAse treated (Zymo). RNA ScreenTape (Agilent) was used to assess quality of RNA samples. Only samples with RIN scores >8 were used for analysis. RNA libraries were prepared by the High Throughput Genomics Shared Resource at the University of Utah with the Illumina TruSeq Stranded Total RNA Library Prep Ribo-Zero Gold and sequenced on a Novaseq with using a 150×150 bp sequencing kit to a depth of 25 million reads per sample. Raw sequencing reads were deposited at NCBI under BioProject PRJNA1005695.

Metagenomic classification and quantification of RNA-sequencing data

Reads were mapped to the GRCz11 Danio rerio genome assembly (Ensembl release 100) with STAR v2.7.3a (Dobin et al., 2013). Unmapped reads from all samples were concatenated and assembled de novo using Trinity v2.11.0 (Grabherr et al., 2011). Prospective taxonomic lineages were assigned to each assembled Trinity “gene” by extracting the best hit (highest bit score) per query from BLASTn (Camacho et al., 2009) or DIAMOND v2.0.14 (Buchfink et al., 2021) searches of the nt or nr NCBI sequence collections (downloaded in May 2022), respectively. All contigs prospectively assigned to microbial lineages were then aligned against all available zebrafish nucleotide sequences with BLASTn. Any contig that aligned a zebrafish sequence with a bitscore of 100 or greater was removed from the collection of contigs. Estimated zebrafish and microbe transcript counts were obtained by mapping reads from each sample to an index of zebrafish transcripts and all newly assembled sequences using Salmon v1.3.0 (Patro et al., 2017) with the validateMappings flag and 20 Gibbs samples. Counts were summed at the gene or taxonomic family level, and normalized counts were generated using DESeq2 v.28.1 (Love et al., 2014).

Phylogenetic analyses

Phylogenies were estimated for viruses in the order Picornavirales using amino acid sequences from prospective 3C protease and 3D RNA-dependent RNA polymerase genes. Sequences from at least one species of all known genera in family Picornaviridae were included, as well as all available sequences from picornaviruses that infect fish. Several representative viruses from other clades of were also included to span the currently known breadth of Picornavirales. Sequences were aligned with MAFFT version 7 (Katoh and Standley, 2013) and manually trimmed to remove sequences at ends with mostly empty columns, resulting in an alignment of 753 amino acid sites across 95 taxa. Evolutionary relationships were inferred using maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses carried out in RAxML-NG version 1.0.2 (Kozlov et al., 2019). The LG+I+G+F substitution model was selected as the best-fit model for the alignment under the Akaike information criterion as determined by ProtTest version 3.4.2 (Darriba et al., 2011). Bootstrapping converged after 650 replicates. Birnavirus phylogenies were estimated using amino acid sequences from VP1 (RdRp) genes. Representative viruses were included from vertebrate and invertebrate hosts. Sequences were aligned using MAFFT-L-INS-i with DASH structures, resulting in an alignment of 1093 amino acid sites across 12 taxa. Evolutionary relationships were inferred using maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses carried out in RAxML-NG (Kozlov et al., 2019). The LG+G+I+F substitution model was selected as the best-fit model for the alignment under the Akaike information criterion as determined by ProtTest (Darriba et al., 2011). Bootstrapping converged after 300 replicates.

Comparisons to Spring viremia of carp virus

Raw fastq reads in BioProject PRJNA690234 (Bai et al., 2021) were downloaded from the Sequence Read Archive at NCBI with the SRA Toolkit. Estimated zebrafish and microbe transcript counts were obtained by mapping reads from each sample to the same index of zebrafish transcripts and all newly assembled sequences using Salmon v1.3.0 (Patro et al., 2017) as described above. Counts were summed at the gene or taxonomic family level, and normalized counts were generated using DESeq2 v.28.1 (Love et al., 2014). All genes with log2-fold changes greater than two and adjusted p-values less than 0.05 were included in comparisons of birnavirus- and SVCV-induced gene sets. Euler plots were generated in R with the eulerr package (Larsson et al., 2022). Gene Ontology enrichment was determined with the PANTHER overrepresentation test (released February 2022) (Thomas et al., 2022).

Supplementary Material

Supplement 1
media-1.csv (2.4MB, csv)
Supplement 2
media-2.csv (9.2MB, csv)
Supplement 3
media-3.csv (135.7KB, csv)
Supplement 4
media-4.pdf (239.1KB, pdf)
Supplement 5
media-5.txt (13.1MB, txt)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by grants awarded by the National Institutes of Health to K.M.B. (5T32AI055434), N.C.E. (R35GM134936), and to J.A.G. (R35GM142950), and by a grant from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to N.C.E. and J.A.G. (DAF2020-218441). We thank the University of Utah High-Throughput Genomics Core, the Center for High Performance Computing, and the Centralized Zebrafish Animal Resource for their support.

REFERENCES

  1. Altan E., Kubiski S.V., Boros Á., Reuter G., Sadeghi M., Deng X., Creighton E.K., Crim M.J., Delwart E., 2019. A Highly Divergent Picornavirus Infecting the Gut Epithelia of Zebrafish (Danio rerio) in Research Institutions Worldwide. Zebrafish 16, 291–299. 10.1089/zeb.2018.1710 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bai J., Yang Z., Li H., Hong Y., Fan D., Lin A., Xiang L., Shao J., 2021. Genome-Wide Characterization of Zebrafish Endogenous Retroviruses Reveals Unexpected Diversity in Genetic Organizations and Functional Potentials. Microbiology Spectrum 9, e02254–21. 10.1128/spectrum.02254-21 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Balla K.M., Rice M.C., Gagnon J.A., Elde N.C., 2020. Linking Virus Discovery to Immune Responses Visualized during Zebrafish Infections. Current Biology 30, 2092–2103.e5. 10.1016/j.cub.2020.04.031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barrow P., Dujardin J.C., Fasel N., Greenwood A.D., Osterrieder K., Lomonossoff G., Fiori P.L., Atterbury R., Rossi M., Lalle M., 2020. Viruses of protozoan parasites and viral therapy: Is the time now right? Virology Journal 17, 142. 10.1186/s12985-020-01410-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bello-Perez M., Medina-Gali R., Coll J., Perez L., 2019. Viral interference between infectious pancreatic necrosis virus and spring viremia of carp virus in zebrafish. Aquaculture 500, 370–377. 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2018.10.039 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Beura L.K., Hamilton S.E., Bi K., Schenkel J.M., Odumade O.A., Casey K.A., Thompson E.A., Fraser K.A., Rosato P.C., Filali-Mouhim A., Sekaly R.P., Jenkins M.K., Vezys V., Haining W.N., Jameson S.C., Masopust D., 2016. Recapitulating adult human immune traits in laboratory mice by normalizing environment. Nature 532, 512–516. 10.1038/nature17655 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Buchfink B., Reuter K., Drost H.-G., 2021. Sensitive protein alignments at tree-of-life scale using DIAMOND. Nat Methods 18, 366–368. 10.1038/s41592-021-01101-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Burns A.R., Guillemin K., 2017. The scales of the zebrafish: host–microbiota interactions from proteins to populations. Current Opinion in Microbiology, Mobile genetic elements and HGT in prokaryotes * Microbiota 38, 137–141. 10.1016/j.mib.2017.05.011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Camacho C., Coulouris G., Avagyan V., Ma N., Papadopoulos J., Bealer K., Madden T.L., 2009. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinformatics 10, 421. 10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Collymore C., Crim M.J., Lieggi C., 2016. Recommendations for Health Monitoring and Reporting for Zebrafish Research Facilities. Zebrafish 13, S–138. 10.1089/zeb.2015.1210 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Creaser C.W., 1934. The Technic of Handling the Zebra Fish (Brachydanio rerio) for the Production of Eggs Which Are Favorable for Embryological Research and Are Available at Any Specified Time Throughout the Year. Copeia 1934, 159–161. 10.2307/1435845 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Darriba D., Taboada G.L., Doallo R., Posada D., 2011. ProtTest 3: fast selection of best-fit models of protein evolution. Bioinformatics 27, 1164–1165. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr088 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Dobin A., Davis C.A., Schlesinger F., Drenkow J., Zaleski C., Jha S., Batut P., Chaisson M., Gingeras T.R., 2013. STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics 29, 15–21. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts635 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dopazo C.P., 2020. The Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus (IPNV) and its Virulence Determinants: What is Known and What Should be Known. Pathogens 9, 94. 10.3390/pathogens9020094 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Duan K., Zhao J., Ren G., Shao Y., Lu T., Xu Lipu, Tang X., Zhao W., Xu Liming, 2021. Molecular Evolution of Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus in China. Viruses 13, 488. 10.3390/v13030488 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Fay E.J., Balla K.M., Roach S.N., Shepherd F.K., Putri D.S., Wiggen T.D., Goldstein S.A., Pierson M.J., Ferris M.T., Thefaine C.E., Tucker A., Salnikov M., Cortez V., Compton S.R., Kotenko S.V., Hunter R.C., Masopust D., Elde N.C., Langlois R.A., 2021. Natural rodent model of viral transmission reveals biological features of virus population dynamics. Journal of Experimental Medicine 219, e20211220. 10.1084/jem.20211220 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Grabherr M.G., Haas B.J., Yassour M., Levin J.Z., Thompson D.A., Amit I., Adiconis X., Fan L., Raychowdhury R., Zeng Q., Chen Z., Mauceli E., Hacohen N., Gnirke A., Rhind N., di Palma F., Birren B.W., Nusbaum C., Lindblad-Toh K., Friedman N., Regev A., 2011. Full-length transcriptome assembly from RNA-Seq data without a reference genome. Nat Biotechnol 29, 644–652. 10.1038/nbt.1883 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Grunwald D.J., Eisen J.S., 2002. Headwaters of the zebrafish — emergence of a new model vertebrate. Nat Rev Genet 3, 717–724. 10.1038/nrg892 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Ingerslev H.-C., Rønneseth A., Pettersen E.F., Wergeland H.I., 2009. Differential Expression of Immune Genes in Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.) Challenged Intraperitoneally or by Cohabitation with IPNV. Scandinavian Journal of Immunology 69, 90–98. 10.1111/j.1365-3083.2008.02201.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Katoh K., Standley D.M., 2013. MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30, 772–780. 10.1093/molbev/mst010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kent M.L., Sanders J.L., Spagnoli S., Al-Samarrie C.E., Murray K.N., 2020. Review of diseases and health management in zebrafish Danio rerio (Hamilton 1822) in research facilities. Journal of Fish Diseases 43, 637–650. 10.1111/jfd.13165 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kent M.L., Wall E.S., Sichel S., Watral V., Stagaman K., Sharpton T.J., Guillemin K., 2021. Pseudocapillaria tomentosa, Mycoplasma spp., and Intestinal Lesions in Experimentally Infected Zebrafish Danio rerio. Zebrafish 18, 207–220. 10.1089/zeb.2020.1955 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Kent M.L., Whipps C.M., Matthews J.L., Florio D., Watral V., Bishop-Stewart J.K., Poort M., Bermudez L., 2004. Mycobacteriosis in zebrafish (Danio rerio) research facilities. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology & Pharmacology, Aquatic Animal Models of Human Disease 138, 383–390. 10.1016/j.cca.2004.08.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Kozlov A.M., Darriba D., Flouri T., Morel B., Stamatakis A., 2019. RAxML-NG: a fast, scalable and user-friendly tool for maximum likelihood phylogenetic inference. Bioinformatics 35, 4453–4455. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz305 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. LaPatra S.E., Barone L., Jones G.R., Zon L.I., 2000. Effects of Infectious Hematopoietic Necrosis Virus and Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus Infection on Hematopoietic Precursors of the Zebrafish. Blood Cells, Molecules, and Diseases 26, 445–452. 10.1006/bcmd.2000.0320 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Larsson J., Godfrey A.J.R., Gustafsson P., algorithms), D.H.E. (geometric, code), E.H. (root solver, Privé F., 2022. eulerr: Area-Proportional Euler and Venn Diagrams with Ellipses. [Google Scholar]
  27. Lawrence C., Mason T., 2012. Zebrafish Housing Systems: A Review of Basic Operating Principles and Considerations for Design and Functionality. ILAR Journal 53, 179–191. 10.1093/ilar.53.2.179 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Love M.I., Huber W., Anders S., 2014. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biology 15, 550. 10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Matthews J.L., Brown A.M.V., Larison K., Bishop-Stewart J.K., Rogers P., Kent M.L., 2001. Pseudoloma neurophilia n. g., n. sp., a New Microsporidium from the Central Nervous System of the Zebrafish (Danio rerio). Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology 48, 227–233. 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2001.tb00307.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. McBeath A.J.A., Snow M., Secombes C.J., Ellis A.E., Collet B., 2007. Expression kinetics of interferon and interferon-induced genes in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) following infection with infectious pancreatic necrosis virus and infectious salmon anaemia virus. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 22, 230–241. 10.1016/j.fsi.2006.05.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Munang’andu H.M., Mutoloki S., Evensen Ø., 2014. Acquired immunity and vaccination against infectious pancreatic necrosis virus of salmon. Developmental & Comparative Immunology, Immunity to infectious diseases of fish 43, 184–196. 10.1016/j.dci.2013.08.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Norris L., Lawler N., Hunkapiller A., Mulrooney D.M., Kent M.L., Sanders J.L., 2020. Detection of the parasitic nematode, Pseudocapillaria tomentosa, in zebrafish tissues and environmental DNA in research aquaria. Journal of Fish Diseases 43, 1087–1095. 10.1111/jfd.13220 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Parichy D.M., 2015. Advancing biology through a deeper understanding of zebrafish ecology and evolution. eLife 4, e05635. 10.7554/eLife.05635 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Patro R., Duggal G., Love M.I., Irizarry R.A., Kingsford C., 2017. Salmon: fast and bias-aware quantification of transcript expression using dual-phase inference. Nat Methods 14, 417–419. 10.1038/nmeth.4197 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Pereiro P., Álvarez-Rodríguez M., Valenzuela-Muñoz V., Gallardo-Escárate C., Figueras A., Novoa B., 2020. RNA-Seq analysis reveals that spring viraemia of carp virus induces a broad spectrum of PIM kinases in zebrafish kidney that promote viral entry. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 99, 86–98. 10.1016/j.fsi.2020.01.055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Reyes-Cerpa S., Reyes-López F.E., Toro-Ascuy D., Ibañez J., Maisey K., Sandino A.M., Imarai M., 2012. IPNV modulation of pro and anti-inflammatory cytokine expression in Atlantic salmon might help the establishment of infection and persistence. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 32, 291–300. 10.1016/j.fsi.2011.11.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Roeselers G., Mittge E.K., Stephens W.Z., Parichy D.M., Cavanaugh C.M., Guillemin K., Rawls J.F., 2011. Evidence for a core gut microbiota in the zebrafish. ISME J 5, 1595–1608. 10.1038/ismej.2011.38 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Sanders G.E., Batts W.N., Winton J.R., 2003. Susceptibility of Zebrafish (Danio rerio) to a Model Pathogen, Spring Viremia of Carp Virus. Comparative Medicine 53, 514–521. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Sanders J.L., Watral V., Kent M.L., 2012. Microsporidiosis in Zebrafish Research Facilities. ILAR Journal 53, 106–113. 10.1093/ilar.53.2.106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Seeley R.J., Perlmutter A., Seeley V.A., 1977. Inheritance and longevity of infectious pancreatic necrosis virus in the zebra fish, Brachydanio rerio (Hamilton-Buchanan). Applied and Environmental Microbiology 34, 50–55. 10.1128/aem.34.1.50-55.1977 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Silveira T., Kütter M.T., Martins C.M.G., Marins L.F., Boyle R.T., Campos V.F., Remião M.H., 2021. First Record of Clinostomum sp. (Digenea: Clinostomidae) in Danio rerio (Actinopterygii: Cyprinidae) and the Implication of Using Zebrafish from Pet Stores on Research. Zebrafish 18, 139–148. 10.1089/zeb.2020.1950 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Tapia D., Kuznar J., Farlora R., Yáñez J.M., 2022. Differential Transcriptomic Response of Rainbow Trout to Infection with Two Strains of IPNV. Viruses 14, 21. 10.3390/v14010021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Thomas P.D., Ebert D., Muruganujan A., Mushayahama T., Albou L.-P., Mi H., 2022. PANTHER: Making genome-scale phylogenetics accessible to all. Protein Science 31, 8–22. 10.1002/pro.4218 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Trevarrow B., Robison B., 2004. Genetic Backgrounds, Standard Lines, and Husbandry of Zebrafish, in: Methods in Cell Biology, The Zebrafish: Genetics, Genomics, and Informatics. Academic Press, pp. 599–616. 10.1016/S0091-679X(04)77032-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Wang Y., Zhang H., Lu Y., Wang F., Liu L., Liu J., Liu X., 2017. Comparative transcriptome analysis of zebrafish (Danio rerio) brain and spleen infected with spring viremia of carp virus (SVCV). Fish & Shellfish Immunology 69, 35–45. 10.1016/j.fsi.2017.07.055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Williams S.H., Che X., Oleynik A., Garcia J.A., Muller D., Zabka T.S., Firth C., Corrigan R.M., Briese T., Jain K., Lipkin W.I., 2019. Discovery of two highly divergent negative-sense RNA viruses associated with the parasitic nematode, Capillaria hepatica, in wild Mus musculus from New York City. Journal of General Virology 100, 1350–1362. 10.1099/jgv.0.001315 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Wolf K., Quimby M.C., Bradford A.D., 1963. Egg-associated transmission of IPN virus of trouts. Virology 21, 317–321. 10.1016/0042-6822(63)90192-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Wolf K., Snieszko S.F., Dunbar C.E., Pyle E., 1960. Virus Nature of Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis in Trout. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 104, 105–108. 10.3181/00379727-104-25743 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Yang Z., He B., Lu Z., Mi S., Jiang J., Liu Z., Tu C., Gong W., 2021. Mammalian birnaviruses identified in pigs infected by classical swine fever virus. Virus Evolution 7, veab084. 10.1093/ve/veab084 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhang W., Wang X., Gao Y., Qi X., 2022. The Over-40-Years-Epidemic of Infectious Bursal Disease Virus in China. Viruses 14, 2253. 10.3390/v14102253 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplement 1
media-1.csv (2.4MB, csv)
Supplement 2
media-2.csv (9.2MB, csv)
Supplement 3
media-3.csv (135.7KB, csv)
Supplement 4
media-4.pdf (239.1KB, pdf)
Supplement 5
media-5.txt (13.1MB, txt)

Articles from bioRxiv are provided here courtesy of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Preprints

RESOURCES