↓ Skip to main content

Live Imaging of Host-Parasite Interactions in a Zebrafish Infection Model Reveals Cryptococcal Determinants of Virulence and Central Nervous System Invasion

Overview of attention for article published in mBio, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
20 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Live Imaging of Host-Parasite Interactions in a Zebrafish Infection Model Reveals Cryptococcal Determinants of Virulence and Central Nervous System Invasion
Published in
mBio, September 2015
DOI 10.1128/mbio.01425-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer L. Tenor, Stefan H. Oehlers, Jialu L. Yang, David M. Tobin, John R. Perfect

Abstract

The human fungal pathogen Cryptococcus neoformans is capable of infecting a broad range of hosts, from invertebrates like amoebas and nematodes to standard vertebrate models such as mice and rabbits. Here we have taken advantage of a zebrafish model to investigate host-pathogen interactions of Cryptococcus with the zebrafish innate immune system, which shares a highly conserved framework with that of mammals. Through live-imaging observations and genetic knockdown, we establish that macrophages are the primary immune cells responsible for responding to and containing acute cryptococcal infections. By interrogating survival and cryptococcal burden following infection with a panel of Cryptococcus mutants, we find that virulence factors initially identified as important in causing disease in mice are also necessary for pathogenesis in zebrafish larvae. Live imaging of the cranial blood vessels of infected larvae reveals that C. neoformans is able to penetrate the zebrafish brain following intravenous infection. By studying a C. neoformans FNX1 gene mutant, we find that blood-brain barrier invasion is dependent on a known cryptococcal invasion-promoting pathway previously identified in a murine model of central nervous system invasion. The zebrafish-C. neoformans platform provides a visually and genetically accessible vertebrate model system for cryptococcal pathogenesis with many of the advantages of small invertebrates. This model is well suited for higher-throughput screening of mutants, mechanistic dissection of cryptococcal pathogenesis in live animals, and use in the evaluation of therapeutic agents. Cryptococcus neoformans is an important opportunistic pathogen that is estimated to be responsible for more than 600,000 deaths worldwide annually. Existing mammalian models of cryptococcal pathogenesis are costly, and the analysis of important pathogenic processes such as meningitis is laborious and remains a challenge to visualize. Conversely, although invertebrate models of cryptococcal infection allow high-throughput assays, they fail to replicate the anatomical complexity found in vertebrates and, specifically, cryptococcal stages of disease. Here we have utilized larval zebrafish as a platform that overcomes many of these limitations. We demonstrate that the pathogenesis of C. neoformans infection in zebrafish involves factors identical to those in mammalian and invertebrate infections. We then utilize the live-imaging capacity of zebrafish larvae to follow the progression of cryptococcal infection in real time and establish a relevant model of the critical central nervous system infection phase of disease in a nonmammalian model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Estonia 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 113 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 24%
Researcher 21 18%
Student > Master 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 17 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 20 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 123. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 December 2018.
All research outputs
#339,860
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from mBio
#240
of 6,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,603
of 286,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from mBio
#9
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,504 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 286,180 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.