Skip to main content
ARS Home » Midwest Area » Ames, Iowa » National Animal Disease Center » Virus and Prion Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #388035

Research Project: Intervention Strategies to Control Endemic and New and Emerging Viral Diseases of Swine

Location: Virus and Prion Research

Title: Host response in the porcine mediastinal lymph node to infection by PRRSV 2, Influenza B and their coinfection

item SARLO DAVILA, KAITLYN - Orise Fellow
item Fleming, Damarius
item MA, WENJUN - Kansas State University
item SANG, YONGMING - Tennessee State University
item Miller, Laura

Submitted to: Conference Research Workers Disease Meeting
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 11/23/2021
Publication Date: 12/4/2021
Citation: Sarlo Davila, K.M., Fleming, D.S., Ma, W., Sang, Y., Miller, L.C. 2021. Host response in the porcine mediastinal lymph node to infection by PRRSV 2, Influenza B and their coinfection. Conference Research Workers Disease Meeting. CRWAD 2021 Proceedings-Page 43.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: Objective Both Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV) and Influenza B (IBV) cause natural infections in pigs. As a primary infection PRRSV can suppress the host immune system, leaving pigs susceptible to secondary infections such as IBV and contributing to the enormous economic impact of the disease. One component of this immunosuppression is the ability of PRRSV to alter gene expression in the mediastinal lymph node. This study investigates the host transcriptomic response in the mediastinal lymph node following PRRSV and IBV infections as well as their coinfection. Methods Seronegative pigs 3 to 4 weeks old were split into four treatment groups: control; intranasally infected with Type 2 PRRSV NPB strain; intranasally infected with B/Brisbane/60/2008 virus; or intranasally coinfected with both viruses. Three pigs from each of the four treatment groups were necropsied 3 days post-infection(dpi) and lymph node samples were collected for transcriptomic analysis. Differentially expressed gene (DEG) analysis was carried out using DeSeq2 based on the model treatment + E. Further analysis for over-enriched gene ontology (G.O.) terms and pathways was performed using the g:Gost function of g:Profiler. Results Comparison to the control samples resulted in 10 statistically significant (FDR <0.10) DEGs for IBV infected samples, 52 DEGs for the PRRSV infected samples, and 51 DEGs for the coinfected samples. The most significantly (FDR <0.05) over enriched GO terms for both IBV and coinfected samples were “establishment of protein localization to organelle”, “nitrogen compound transport”, and “intracellular protein transport”. These terms were not significant for PRRSV infected samples for which the most significantly over enriched GO terms were “antigen receptor-mediated signaling pathway”, “immune response-regulating cell surface receptor”, and “immune response-regulating signaling pathway”. These terms were also over enriched in the coinfected samples. Conclusions The differences in gene expression between treatment groups may indicate why PRRSV infections persist while, IBV infections clear, and therefore provide a greater understanding of the pathology of these diseases.