Skip to main content
Download PDF

Interaction between Wolbachia pipientis and Leishmania infantum in heartworm infected dogs

Parasites & Vectors volume 16, Article number: 77 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Wolbachia is a Gram-negative endosymbiont associated with several species of arthropods and filarioid nematodes, including Dirofilaria immitis. This endosymbiont may elicit a Th1 response, which is a component of the immunity against Leishmania infantum.

Methods

To investigate the interactions between Wolbachia of D. immitis and L. infantum in naturally infected dogs and cytokine circulation, dogs without clinical signs (n = 187) were selected. Dogs were tested for microfilariae (mfs) by Knott, for female antigens of D. immitis by SNAP, and for anti-L. infantum antibodies by IFAT and assigned to four groups. Dogs of group 1 (G1) and 2 (G2) were positive for D. immitis and positive or negative to L. infantum, respectively. Dogs of group 3 (G3) and 4 (G4) were negative to D. immitis and positive or negative to L. infantum, respectively. Wolbachia and L. infantum DNA was quantified by real-time PCR (qPCR) in dog blood samples. A subset of dogs (n = 65) was examined to assess pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokine production using an ELISA test.

Results

Of 93 dogs positive to D. immitis with circulating mfs, 85% were positive to Wolbachia, with the highest amount of DNA detected in G1 and the lowest in dogs with low mfs load in G1 and G2. Among dogs positive to L. infantum, 66% from G1 showed low antibody titer, while 48.9% from G3 had the highest antibody titer. Of 37 dogs positive to Wolbachia from G1, 26 (70.3%) had low antibody titers to L. infantum (1:160). Among cytokines, TNFα showed the highest mean concentration in G1 (246.5 pg/ml), IFNγ being the one most represented (64.3%). IL-10 (1809.5 pg/ml) and IL-6 (123.5 pg/ml) showed the highest mean concentration in dogs from G1. A lower percentage of dogs producing IL-4 was observed in all groups examined, with the highest mean concentration (2794 pg/ml) recorded in G2.

Conclusion

Results show the association of D. immitis and Wolbachia with the lower antibody titers of L. infantum in co-infected dogs, suggesting the hypothesis that the endosymbiont may affect the development of the patent leishmaniosis. However, due to the limitations associated with the heterogeneity of naturally infected dogs in field conditions, results should be validated by investigation on experimental models.

Graphical Abstract

Background

The endosymbiotic relationship described between Wolbachia and filarioid nematodes (families Onchocercinae, Dirofilariinae and Splendidofilariinae) has important implications in the biological processes of reproduction, development, molting and embryogenesis of filarioids [1,2,3,4]. Dirofilaria immitis, the causative agent of the canine heartworm disease (HWD), harbors Wolbachia endosymbiont in all its developmental stages, from adult to microfilariae (mfs) [5]. In addition, clinical studies indicate that Wolbachia is released into the bloodstream of hosts after death of D. immitis [6], also because of filaricidal treatment [7, 8]. Furthermore, Wolbachia associated to D. immitis infection may increase the severity of the clinical signs of HWD by triggering inflammatory response [7, 9,10,11]. As observed in other filarioids, such as Onchocerca volvulus [12], D. immitis may stimulate Th2 anti-inflammatory response, while Wolbachia triggers the Th1 pro-inflammatory response [10, 13, 14]. The latter is likely due to the effect that Wolbachia surface protein (WSP) and other molecules exert on antigen presenting cells and cytokine production [6, 7, 12, 15,16,17,18]. In addition, in vitro experiment using Asaia-WSP engineered bacterium was shown to elicit the Th1 cellular response against Leishmania infantum, with a protozoal killing effect [19].

Given the sympatric occurrence of L. infantum and D. immitis in many geographical areas around the world [20,21,22,23,24], the association of both vector-borne pathogens is of major interest from a diagnostic and clinical perspective [25]. For example, the prevalence of D. immitis infection increased in areas of southern Europe, where canine leishmaniosis (CanL) was historically endemic, as a consequence of pets traveling with their owners (i.e. from endemic to previously non-endemic regions) and changes in arthropod vector ecology and distribution [20, 21, 24, 26,27,28,29,30]. This overlapping geographical distribution of D. immitis and L. infantum led to potential immune interactions [20, 21, 24, 27, 28]. Indeed, the prevalence of dogs without clinical signs [31] depends on the balance between Th1 and Th2 immune response [32,33,34,35], which may be regulated by a plethora of factors (e.g. animal genetic, health and nutritional status, concurrent infections) [36]. In this context, the clinical manifestations of a patent leishmaniosis in dogs co-infected by D. immitis may be affected by the presence of Wolbachia endosymbiont [21, 27, 32]. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the interactions of Wolbachia in dogs naturally infected by D. immitis and/or L. infantum and to assess the relationship between pathogen infection and cytokine circulation.

Methods

Enrolled animals, parasitological and serological examination

A total of 187 dogs presenting no apparent clinical signs were selected to reduce other factors that could interfere with the analyses. All dogs, living in two municipal shelters in southern Italy (Lecce: 40.419326N, 18.165582E; Casarano 40.0126N, 18.1606E) were subjected to physical examination to establish their health status. Among them, a cohort of dogs (n = 84) was enrolled from a previous study aiming to control D. immitis and L. infantum infection [24].

Blood samples were collected from either the cephalic or jugular veins and placed in a K3 EDTA tube (2 ml) and in a clot activator tube (5 ml) to obtain serum after centrifugation (15 min at 1500 × g). Individual blood samples were screened by modified Knott test for the detection of mfs of D. immitis, as previously described [37]. The mfs identification was performed measuring the body length and width of specimens and by morphological analysis of the front end and the tail according to [38], using a digitally captured image software LAS V4.5 (Leica Microsystems). The count of the mfs (2 × 50 μl) was based on the average of the counting in the two slides. Dogs with a mfs load ≥ 600 mfs/20 μl were considered highly microfilaremic [24]. Serum samples were tested for the antigen detection of adult females of D. immitis by SNAP® 4Dx® Plus Test (IDEXX Laboratories, Inc.), according to the manufacturer's instructions.

To assess the exposure of dogs to L. infantum infection, sera were tested by immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) using as antigen the promastigotes of L. infantum zymodeme MON-1, as previously described [39]. Samples were considered positive when they produced a clear cytoplasmic and membrane fluorescence of promastigotes from a cut-off dilution of 1:80. Positive sera were titrated by serial dilutions until negative results were obtained.

Subsequently, all dogs were divided into four groups based on their positivity/negativity for mfs of D. immitis and to anti-Leishmania antibodies. Specifically, dogs positive for mfs and positive and/or negative to IFAT were grouped in G1 (n = 47) and G2 (n = 46), respectively, while dogs negative for mfs and for female antigens of D. immitis and positive or negative to IFAT were included in G3 (n = 47) and G4 (n = 47), respectively (Table 1).

Table 1 Dogs included in the study divided according to their positivity/negativity to Dirofilaria immitis and Leishmania infantum, microfilariae (mfs) load, IFAT titer and  positivity for Wolbachia and L. infantum by qPCR 
Full size table

In addition, a group of dogs (n = 65), selected based on their negativity and/or positivity to IFAT with a titer ≥ 1:160 and for mfs, were examined by analyzing the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) and interferon-gamma (IFNγ) and of anti-inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-4 (IL-4), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and interleukin-10 (IL-10) using an ELISA kit, (Biolegend, USA, and Thermo Fisher, USA) (Table 2). The positivity of the sera was determined based on specific standard curves.

Table 2 Prevalence of cytokine production, calculated as the percentage of dogs from each group producing one cytokine, divided according to groups
Full size table

Genomic DNA blood extraction and molecular procedures

Genomic DNA (gDNA) was extracted from each blood sample using the GenUPgDNA commercial kit (Biotechrabbit GmbH, Hennigsdorf, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. All samples were tested for L. infantum kDNA minicircle by real time-PCR (qPCR) using the primers, probes and cycle protocol described elsewhere [40]. gDNA from L. infantum isolate cultured zymodeme MON-1 was used as positive control, whereas gDNA extracted from blood sample from a healthy dog was used as negative controls.

Samples were tested for Wolbachia of D. immitis by qPCR using primers (111 bp, WDiro.ftsZ.490-F/WDiro.ftsZ.600-R) and probe wDimm.ftsZ.523p (6FAM-CGTATTGCAGAGCTCGGATTA-TAMRA) targeting the ftsZ gene as previously described [41] with minor modifications.

Briefly, all qPCR reactions were carried out in a final volume of 20 μl, consisting of 10 μl IQ Supermix (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA), 6 μl diethyl pyrocarbonate (DEPC)-treated pyrogen-free DNase/RNase-free water (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA), 2.5 μl of template DNA (except no-template control), primers and probe at 50 μM and 20 μM concentration, respectively. The run protocol consisted of a hot-start at 95 °C for 3 min and 40 cycles of denaturation (95 °C for 5 s) and annealing-extension (60 °C for 30 s). The qPCR was performed in a CFX96 Real-Time System (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., Hercules, CA, USA), and the increase in the fluorescent signal was registered during the extension step of the reaction and analyzed using CFX Manager Software, version 3.1 (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., Hercules, CA, USA). All the samples were tested in duplicate, and DNA of adult of D. immitis and that from blood samples of pathogen-free dogs were used as positive and negative controls. The positivity for Wolbachia was established based on the threshold cycle (Ct) value up to 38.5.

Statistical analysis

Associations between infections and variables were assessed through univariate analysis. Exact binomial test established the confidence intervals (CI) with 95% confidence level. The Chi-square χ2 test was used to compare percentages of positivity among categories of the same independent variables. Collinearity among independent variables was assessed using Pearsonʼs correlation coefficient. A P-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed using StatLib for Windows (version 13.0, SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) Quantitative Parasitology 3.0 [42] and GraphPad Prism 8 software.

Results

Of 93 mfs-positive dogs, 79 (85%) tested positive for Wolbachia DNA (Table 1), with 37 from G1 (46.8%; 95% CI: 0.355–0.584) and 42 from G2 (53.2%; 95% CI: 0.416–0.645). The highest amount of Wolbachia DNA (Ct value 22.1) was detected in a dog from G1 (mfs load ≥ 600) and the lowest (Ct value 37.4) in dogs with low mfs load (i.e. 1 ≤ mfs ≤ 200) in both G1 and G2 (Table 1). No statistically significant difference in Wolbachia prevalence was observed between dogs from G1 and G2, though an overall higher value (37.6%) was recorded in dogs with a Wolbachia Ct values ranging from 25 to 30 (Table 3). In G1, a statistical difference was observed between dogs with Wolbachia Ct value of 25–30 vs. 30–34 (χ2 = 6, P < 0.0138) and vs. Ct > 35 (χ2 = 12.3, P = 0.0004) having a high mfs load and between low vs. high mfs score (χ2 = 10.64, P = 0.011) (Table 3). In G2, a statistically significant difference (χ2 = 9.8, P = 0.00178) was observed between dogs with Wolbachia Ct value of 25–30 and 30–34 vs. > 35, having high mfs load (Table 3).

Table 3 Prevalence of Wolbachia in dogs positive for Dirofilaria immitis divided according to the microfilaria load and the range of Ct value of qPCR
Full size table

Of 94 dogs positive for anti-Leishmania antibodies, 31 were from G1 (66%; 95% CI: 0.507–0.791) with low antibody titers (up to 1:160), followed by 16 dogs (34%; 95% CI: 0.209–0.49) with higher titers (from 1:320 to 1:2560). In G3, 23 dogs (48.9%; 95% CI: 0.341–0.639) had a high antibody titer (from 1:320 to 1:2560) (Table 1). The qPCR screened eight positive dogs of 187 blood samples examined for kDNA of L. infantum (4.3%) with a minimum and maximum Ct value (min = 24.7, max = 37.8) detected for dogs from G1 (Table 1).

Of 37 dogs positive for Wolbachia in G1, 26 (70.3%; 95% CI: 0.530–0.841) had low antibody titers (n = 20 1:80, n = 6 1:160) against L. infantum (Table 4). A statistical difference was observed between dogs showing the highest amount of Wolbachia DNA (Ct value range of 25–30) and those with antibody titers ranging from 1:320 to 1:2560 (χ2 = 6.8, P = 0.0089) (Table 4).

Table 4 Wolbachia-positive dogs divided according to Ct value of endosymbiont DNA and Leishmania infantum positivity to different tests
Full size table

IL-10 (55.4%) and IFNγ (44.6%) were the most prevalent cytokines produced throughout dogs examined (Table 2 and Fig. 1). In particular, the percentage of dogs producing TNFα was higher in G2 (42.8%) than G1 (28.6%) and G4 (14.3%). However, the highest mean of TNFα concentration was detected in G1 (246.5 pg/ml) and the lowest in G2 (65.1 pg/ml) and G4 (13.3 pg/ml) (Table 2, Fig. 1). A statistically significant difference (χ2 = 7.3, P = 0.007) was recorded analyzing the percentages of IFNγ-positive sera between dogs from G1 (64.3%) and G4 (14.2%), with the same percentage of positive dogs in G2 and G3 (50%) (Table 2). The highest mean of concentration of IFNγ production was observed in G2 (105.4 pg/ml) and G3 (97.23 pg/ml) (Table 2, Fig. 1). The highest percentage of dogs producing IL-10 (71.4%) was observed in G1 (mean concentration of 1809.5 pg/ml) followed by G4 (57.1%) and G3 (42.8%) (Table 2). The lowest percentage of dogs producing IL-4 was observed in G1 (7.1%), G2 and G3 (28.5%) (Table 2, Fig. 1). The highest mean concentration of IL-4 was observed in G2 (2794.5 pg/ml). IL-6 showed the same percentage of positivity in G1 and G4 (35.7%) and in G2 and G3 (50%), respectively, with the highest mean concentration registered in G1 (123.5 pg/ml) and a similar concentration observed in G2 (30.2 pg/ml) and G3 (29.7 pg/ml) (Table 2, Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Concentrations of A tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα), B interleukin-10 (IL-10), C interleukin-6 (IL-6), D interleukin-4 (IL-4) and E interferon-γ (IFNγ) in sera from dogs positive for Leishmania infantum and Dirofilaria immitis (Group 1), positive only for Dirofilaria immitis (Group 2), positive only for Leishmania infantum (Group 3) and negative to both pathogens (Group 4)

Full size image

Except for IFNγ, no statistically significant differences were observed in cytokine production between groups, but within groups. In particular, in G1 a statistically significant difference was observed between dogs producing TNFα vs. IL-10 (χ2 = 5.1, P = 0.023), IFNγ vs. IL-4 (χ2 = 9.9, P = 0.001), IL-10 vs. IL-4 (χ2 = 12.1, P = 0.005) and IL-4 vs. IL-6 (χ2 = 17.4, P = 0.00003). Similarly, in G4 a statistically significant difference was observed between IFNγ and TNFα vs. IL-10 and between IL-10 vs. IL-4 (χ2 = 5.6, P = 0.018). No statistically significant difference was observed in cytokine production within groups G2 and G3 (Table 2). In addition, a statistically significant difference was observed in G1 between dogs positive for Wolbachia vs. TNFα (χ2 = 9.3, P = 0.022), IL-4 (χ2 = 17.4, P = 0.00003) and IL-6 (χ2 = 7.3, P = 0.0067) (Table 2).

Discussion

Data herein presented suggest that Wolbachia, associated with D. immitis, may affect the immune response against L. infantum of naturally co-infected dogs through a stimulatory or immune-suppressive mechanism [4]. Indeed, the high molecular prevalence of Wolbachia in co-infected dogs (78.7%) is coherent with the hypothesis that this endosymbiont might control the Leishmania infection. Overall, the prevalence of Wolbachia observed in co-infected dogs is in line with data described in a previous study [21], where the endosymbiont was detected in 68.8% dogs from Portugal. Nevertheless, the high amount of Wolbachia DNA in relationship to the mfs load (i.e. mfs > 600; Ct 25–30) exclusively observed in co-infected dogs (63.2%) differed from a previous study from Spain, where Wolbachia was more frequently detected in microfilaraemic dogs not infected with L. infantum [27]. In addition, in this previous study, an increased severity of clinical leishmaniotic signs was observed in microfilaraemic dogs with a lower prevalence of Wolbachia [27]. Furthermore, the role of the endosymbiont in stimulating a Th1 immune response was also suggested by the low number (3/11) of co-infected dogs with clinical signs, as previously described [21].

The role of Wolbachia in controlling the development of CanL may be highlighted by the high prevalence of co-infected dogs (70.3%) showing a low anti-Leishmania antibody titer (up to 1:160), likely due to the low parasitic load detected by qPCR in the blood [43], while a high value of IFAT titers was observed in most of dogs (48.9%) infected only with L. infantum.

Furthermore, the absence of clinical signs in dogs may be also determined by the stimulation of a Th1 immune response triggered by the endosymbiont bacterium by production of high levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines [12, 19, 21, 27, 44]. For example, the high Wolbachia amount recorded in co-infected dogs may trigger an elevated TNFα production (mean value 246.5 pg/ml), which was not recorded in dogs infected with only L. infantum. The strong effect of Wolbachia in producing this pro-inflammatory cytokine has also been demonstrated in an in vitro experiment [19], regardless of the presence of L. infantum. However, the absence of TNFα observed in dogs positive for L. infantum agrees with previous studies where the cytokine was detected only in a few dogs with active leishmaniosis [45, 46].

The Wolbachia amount detected in co-infected dogs, and consequently its effect on controlling the L. infantum infection, may also be supported by the high prevalence of dogs (64.3%) producing IFNγ, a similar mean cytokine concentration value being observed between these dogs (88.2 pg/ml) and those positive for L. infantum (97.23 pg/ml) or D. immitis (105.4 pg/ml). Accordingly, IFN-γ was associated with the absence or low antibody titer against L. infantum [47]. Besides TNFα and IFNγ, the detection of IL-4, IL-6 and IL-10 in infected dogs indicates a mixed Th1/Th2 immune response. Indeed, in previous studies using peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of dogs experimentally infected with L. infantum or stimulated with L. infantum antigen, an increase in IFNγ, IL-10 and IL-4 mRNA expression levels were recorded [35, 48, 49]. In addition, the expression of cytokines related to both Th1/Th2 responses was also detected in dogs naturally infected with D. immitis with circulating mfs associated to the presence of Wolbachia [10, 50]. All the above considerations may justify the high mean concentration (1809.5 pg/ml) of IL-10 recorded in co-infected dogs as well as its even production in dogs infected with D. immitis (507.8 pg/ml) or L. infantum (677.4 pg/ml). However, though IL-10 is considered a predictive parameter of the evolution of CanL and active visceral leishmaniosis in humans [51,52,53], other studies described the expression of this cytokine in dogs without clinical signs [48, 54,55,56]. Furthermore, the detection of IL-10 in uninfected dogs (863.8 pg/ml) agrees with the results described elsewhere [54], where the mRNA accumulation of this cytokine in dogs with severe disease was comparable with that of uninfected control dogs. Similarly, the detection of IL-4 in all groups of dogs examined is not surprising, considering that the role of this cytokine in the pathogenesis of CanL is still debated [54]. Indeed, in the current study a very low mean concentration (77.2 pg/ml) of IL-4 was detected in co-infected dogs compared with those recorded in L. infantum infected (254.9 pg/ml) or uninfected dogs (111.7 pg/ml). However, other studies also described these contrasting results, IL-4 being detected readily or not in L. infantum infected or asymptomatic dogs [48, 54, 57, 58]. The Wolbachia amount recorded in the co-infected dogs may have affected the IL-6 production (123.5 pg/ml) in these dogs. Indeed, the role of this endosymbiont in stimulation of IL-6 production was also supported by an in vitro experiment [19]. However, though IL-6 is generally regarded as a Th2 cytokine with disease progression, other studies described its protective role in some forms of leishmaniosis [59], thus indicating an imperfect fitting of this cytokine into the Th1/Th2 paradigm [45, 48, 60].

Overall, interpreting the cytokine expression profile in CanL is still problematic, and the differences observed regarding the role of cytokines may be due to the different methods used for the analyses (i.e. dosage by ELISA or evaluation of mRNA expression) [48, 54, 56]. In addition, immune response mediated by cytokines may be influenced by several variables (i.e. age, tissues examined) [35, 53]. Thus, the comprehensive knowledge of cytokine response and their interaction is a very crucial step to understand disease progression, mainly in co-infected dogs.

Conclusions

Though the present work has some limitations, such as the low number of dogs included and their heterogeneity, and the lack of a follow-up study, the results presented suggest the involvement of Wolbachia in clinical leishmaniosis, pointing at a possible role of this endosymbiont in the modulation of the Th1 immune response. However, future studies based on the simultaneous combination of different approaches of analysis (i.e. expression of the mRNA vs. quantification of cytokine production) is mandatory.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Abbreviations

CanL:

Canine leishmaniosis

Ct:

Threshold cycle

qPCR:

Real-time PCR

EDTA:

Ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid

IFAT:

Indirect immunofluorescent antibody test

CI:

Confidence intervals

ELISA:

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

TNFα:

Tumor necrosis factor α

IFNγ:

Interferon-gamma

IL-4:

Interleukin-4

IL-6:

Interleukin-6

IL-10:

Interleukin-10

References

  1. Taylor MJ, Bandi C, Hoerauf A. Wolbachia bacterial endosymbionts of filarial nematodes. Adv Parasitol. 2005;60:245–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bandi C, Trees AJ, Brattig NW. Wolbachia in filarial nematodes: evolutionary aspects and implications for the pathogenesis and treatment of filarial diseases. Vet Parasitol. 2001;98:215–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Martin C, Gavotte L. The bacteria Wolbachia in filariae, a biological Russian dolls’ system: new trends in antifilarial treatments. Parasite. 2010;17:79–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Manoj RRS, Latrofa MS, Epis S, Otranto D. Wolbachia: endosymbiont of onchocercid nematodes and their vectors. Parasit Vectors. 2021;14:245.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Sironi M, Bandi C, Sacchi L, Di Sacco B, Damiani G, Genchi C. Molecular evidence for a close relative of the arthropod endosymbiont Wolbachia in a filarial worm. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 1995;74:223–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Simón F, Siles-Lucas M, Morchón R, González-Miguel J, Mellado I, Carretón E, et al. Human and animal dirofilariasis: the emergence of a zoonotic mosaic. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2012;25:507–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Kramer L, Simón F, Tamarozzi F, Genchi M, Bazzocchi C. Is Wolbachia complicating the pathological effects of Dirofilaria immitis infections? Vet Parasitol. 2005;133:133–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Louzada-Flores VN, Kramer L, Brianti E, Napoli E, Mendoza-Roldan JA, Bezerra-Santos MA, et al. Treatment with doxycycline is associated with complete clearance of circulating Wolbachia DNA in Dirofilaria immitis-naturally infected dogs. Acta Trop. 2022;232:106513.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kramer L, Grandi G, Leoni M, Passeri B, McCall J, Genchi C, et al. Wolbachia and its influence on the pathology and immunology of Dirofilaria immitis infection. Vet Parasitol. 2008;158:191–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Morchón R, López-Belmonte J, Bazzocchi C, Grandi G, Kramer L, Simón F. Dogs with patent Dirofilaria immitis infection have higher expression of circulating IL-4, IL-10 and iNOS mRNA than those with occult infection. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2007;115:184–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Genchi C, Kramer LH, Sassera D, Bandi C. Wolbachia and its implications for the immunopathology of filariasis. Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets. 2012;12:53–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Brattig NW, Bazzocchi C, Kirschning CJ, Reiling N, Büttner DW, Ceciliani F, et al. The major surface protein of Wolbachia endosymbionts in filarial nematodes elicits immune responses through TLR2 and TLR4. J Immunol. 2004;173:437–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Punkosdy GA, Addiss DG, Lammie PJ. Characterization of antibody responses to Wolbachia surface protein in humans with lymphatic filariasis. Infect Immun. 2003;71:5104–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kramer LH, Tamarozzi F, Morchón R, López-Belmonte J, Marcos-Atxutegi C, Martín-Pacho R, et al. Immune response to and tissue localization of the Wolbachia surface protein (WSP) in dogs with natural heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) infection. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2005;106:303–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bazzocchi C, Ceciliani F, McCall JW, Ricci I, Genchi C, Bandi C. Antigenic role of the endosymbionts of filarial nematodes: IgG response against the Wolbachia surface protein in cats infected with Dirofilaria immitis. Proc Biol Sci. 2000;267:2511–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bazzocchi C, Genchi C, Paltrinieri S, Lecchi C, Mortarino M, Bandi C. Immunological role of the endosymbionts of Dirofilaria immitis: the Wolbachia surface protein activates canine neutrophils with production of IL-8. Vet Parasitol. 2003;117:73–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pinto SB, Mariconti M, Bazzocchi C, Bandi C, Sinkins SP. Wolbachia surface protein induces innate immune responses in mosquito cells. BMC Microbiol. 2012;12:S11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Bouchery T, Lefoulon E, Karadjian G, Nieguitsila A, Martin C. The symbiotic role of Wolbachia in Onchocercidae and its impact on filariasis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013;19:131–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Varotto-Boccazzi I, Epis S, Arnoldi I, Corbett Y, Gabrieli P, Paroni M, et al. Boosting immunity to treat parasitic infections: Asaia bacteria expressing a protein from Wolbachia determine M1 macrophage activation and killing of Leishmania protozoans. Pharmacol Res. 2020;161:105288.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Otranto D, Capelli G, Genchi C. Changing distribution patterns of canine vector borne diseases in Italy: leishmaniosis vs. dirofilariosis. Parasit Vectors. 2009;2:S2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Maia C, Altet L, Serrano L, Cristóvão JM, Tabar MD, Francino O, et al. Molecular detection of Leishmania infantum, filariae and Wolbachia spp in dogs from southern Portugal. Parasit Vectors. 2016;9:170.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Mera Y, Sierra R, Neira G, Cargnelutti DE. Dissemination of visceral leishmaniasis to Western Argentina: When will imported canine vector-borne zoonotic diseases start being local? J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2017;50:727–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dantas-Torres F, Figueredo LA, Sales KGDS, Miranda DEO, Alexandre JLA, da Silva YY, et al. Prevalence and incidence of vector-borne pathogens in unprotected dogs in two Brazilian regions. Parasit Vectors. 2020;13:195.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Panarese R, Iatta R, Latrofa MS, Zatelli A, Ćupina AI, Montarsi F, et al. Hyperendemic Dirofilaria immitis infection in a sheltered dog population: an expanding threat in the Mediterranean region. Int J Parasitol. 2020;50:555–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Momčilović S, Cantacessi C, Arsić-Arsenijević V, Otranto D, Tasić-Otašević S. Rapid diagnosis of parasitic diseases: current scenario and future needs. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019;25:290–309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Genchi C, Rinaldi L, Cascone C, Mortarino M, Cringoli G. Is heartworm disease really spreading in Europe? Vet Parasitol. 2005;133:137–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tabar MD, Altet L, Martínez V, Roura X. Wolbachia, filariae and Leishmania coinfection in dogs from a Mediterranean area. J Small Anim Pract. 2013;54:174–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mendoza-Roldan J, Benelli G, Panarese R, Iatta R, Furlanello T, Beugnet F, et al. Leishmania infantum and Dirofilaria immitis infections in Italy, 2009–2019: changing distribution patterns. Parasit Vectors. 2020;13:193.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Iatta R, Mendoza-Roldan JA, Latrofa MS, Cascio A, Brianti E, Pombi M, et al. Leishmania tarentolae and Leishmania infantum in humans, dogs and cats in the Pelagie archipelago, southern Italy. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15:e0009817.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Brianti E, Panarese R, Napoli E, De Benedetto G, Gaglio G, Bezerra-Santos MA, et al. Dirofilaria immitis infection in the Pelagie archipelago: the southernmost hyperendemic focus in Europe. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022;69:1274–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Dantas-Torres F, Solano-Gallego L, Baneth G, Ribeiro VM, de Paiva-Cavalcanti M, Otranto D. Canine leishmaniosis in the Old and New Worlds: unveiled similarities and differences. Trends Parasitol. 2012;28:531–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Solbach W, Laskay T. The host response to Leishmania infection. Adv Immunol. 2000;74:275–317.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Panaro MA, Brandonisio O, Cianciulli A, Cavallo P, Lacasella V, Paradies P, et al. Cytokine expression in dogs with natural Leishmania infantum infection. Parasitology. 2009;136:823–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Toepp AJ, Petersen CA. The balancing act: Immunology of leishmaniosis. Res Vet Sci. 2020;130:19–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Samant M, Sahu U, Pandey SC, Khare P. Role of cytokines in experimental and human visceral leishmaniasis. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11:624009.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Quilez J, Martínez V, Woolliams JA, Sanchez A, Pong-Wong R, Kennedy LJ, et al. Genetic control of canine leishmaniasis: genome-wide association study and genomic selection analysis. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:e35349.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Knott J. A method for making microfilarial survey on day blood. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1939;33:191–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kelly JD. Detection and differentiation of microfilariae in canine blood. Aust Vet J. 1973;49:23–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Iatta R, Trerotoli P, Lucchese L, Natale A, Buonavoglia C, Nachum-Biala Y, et al. Validation of a new immunofluorescence antibody test for the detection of Leishmania infantum infection in cats. Parasitol Res. 2020;119:1381–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Francino O, Altet L, Sánchez-Robert E, Rodriguez A, Solano-Gallego L, Alberola J, et al. Advantages of real-time PCR assay for diagnosis and monitoring of canine leishmaniosis. Vet Parasitol. 2006;137:214–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Laidoudi Y, Davoust B, Varloud M, Niang EHA, Fenollar F, Mediannikov O. Development of a multiplex qPCR-based approach for the diagnosis of Dirofilaria immitis, D. repens and Acanthocheilonema reconditum. Parasit Vectors. 2020;13:319.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Rózsa L, Reiczigel J, Majoros G. Quantifying parasites in samples of hosts. J Parasitol. 2000;86:228–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Otranto D, Paradies P, de Caprariis D, Stanneck D, Testini G, Grimm F, et al. Toward diagnosing Leishmania infantum infection in asymptomatic dogs in an area where leishmaniasis is endemic. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2009;16:337–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Oleaga A, Pérez-Sánchez R, Pagés E, Marcos-Atxutegi C, Simón F. Identification of immunoreactive proteins from the dog heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) differentially recognized by the sera from dogs with patent or occult infections. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 2009;166:134–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Pinelli E, Killick-Kendrick R, Wagenaar J, Bernadina W, del Real G, Ruitenberg J. Cellular and humoral immune responses in dogs experimentally and naturally infected with Leishmania infantum. Infect Immun. 1994;62:229–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. de Lima VM, Peiro JR, de Oliveira VR. IL-6 and TNF-alpha production during active canine visceral leishmaniasis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2007;115:189–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Priolo V, Martínez-Orellana P, Pennisi MG, Raya-Bermúdez AI, Jurado-Tarifa E, Masucci M, et al. Leishmania infantum specific humoral and cellular immune responses in cats and dogs: a comparative cross-sectional study. Vet Sci. 2022;9:482.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Chamizo C, Moreno J, Alvar J. Semi-quantitative analysis of cytokine expression in asymptomatic canine leishmaniasis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2005;103:67–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Menezes-Souza D, Corrêa-Oliveira R, Guerra-Sá R, Giunchetti RC, Teixeira-Carvalho A, Martins-Filho OA, et al. Cytokine and transcription factor profiles in the skin of dogs naturally infected by Leishmania (Leishmania) chagasi presenting distinct cutaneous parasite density and clinical status. Vet Parasitol. 2011;177:39–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Simón F, Kramer LH, Román A, Blasini W, Morchón R, Marcos-Atxutegi C, et al. Immunopathology of Dirofilaria immitis infection. Vet Res Commun. 2007;31:161–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Nylén S, Sacks D. Interleukin-10 and the pathogenesis of human visceral leishmaniasis. Trends Immunol. 2007;28:378–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Boggiatto PM, Ramer-Tait AE, Metz K, Kramer EE, Gibson-Corley K, Mullin K, et al. Immunologic indicators of clinical progression during canine Leishmania infantum infection. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2010;17:267–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Maia C, Campino L. Cytokine and phenotypic cell profiles of Leishmania infantum infection in the dog. J Trop Med. 2012;2012:541571.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Quinnell RJ, Courtenay O, Shaw MA, Day MJ, Garcez LM, Dye C, et al. Tissue cytokine responses in canine visceral leishmaniasis. J Infect Dis. 2001;183:1421–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Manna L, Reale S, Viola E, Vitale F, Foglia Manzillo V, Pavone LM, et al. Leishmania DNA load and cytokine expression levels in asymptomatic naturally infected dogs. Vet Parasitol. 2006;142:271–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Panaro MA, Brandonisio O, de Caprariis D, Cavallo P, Cianciulli A, Mitolo V, et al. Canine leishmaniasis in Southern Italy: a role for nitric oxide released from activated macrophages in asymptomatic infection? Parasit Vectors. 2008;1:10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Barbosa MA, Alexandre-Pires G, Soares-Clemente M, Marques C, Rodrigues OR, De Brito TV, et al. Cytokine gene expression in the tissues of dogs infected by Leishmania infantum. J Comp Pathol. 2011;145:336–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Dayakar A, Chandrasekaran S, Kuchipudi SV, Kalangi SK. Cytokines: Key determinants of resistance or disease progression in visceral leishmaniasis: opportunities for novel diagnostics and immunotherapy. Front Immunol. 2019;10:670.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Stäger S, Maroof A, Zubairi S, Sanos SL, Kopf M, Kaye PM. Distinct roles for IL-6 and IL-12p40 in mediating protection against Leishmania donovani and the expansion of IL-10+ CD4+ T cells. Eur J Immunol. 2006;36:1764–71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Diehl S, Rincón M. The two faces of IL-6 on Th1/Th2 differentiation. Mol Immunol. 2002;39:531–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by EU funding within the NextGenerationEU-MUR PNRR Extended Partnership initiative on Emerging Infectious Diseases (Project no. PE00000007, INF-ACT).  S.E. and C.B. thank the UNIMI GSA-IDEA project.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Maria Stefania Latrofa, Viviane Noll Louzada-Flores, Jairo Alfonso Mendoza-Roldan, Andrea Zatelli & Domenico Otranto

  2. Department of Biosciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Ilaria Varotto-Boccazzi, Sara Epis & Claudio Bandi

  3. Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Roberta Iatta

  4. Hospital Clínic Veterinari, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Xavier Roura

  5. Pediatric CRC ‘Fondazione Romeo ed Enrica Invernizzi’, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Sara Epis & Claudio Bandi

  6. Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran

    Domenico Otranto

Authors
  1. Maria Stefania Latrofa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilaria Varotto-Boccazzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Viviane Noll Louzada-Flores
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roberta Iatta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jairo Alfonso Mendoza-Roldan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xavier Roura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrea Zatelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Sara Epis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Claudio Bandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Domenico Otranto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, MSL, DO; Methodology, MSL, IVB, VNLF, RI, SE; Formal Analysis, MSL, IVB, VNLF, RI; Writing Original Draft Preparation, MSL, DO; Writing-Review & Editing, MSL, IVB, VNLF, RI, JAMR, AZ, XR, SE, CB, DO; Supervision, MSL, SE, CB, DO. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Domenico Otranto.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Protocols for collection of dog samples were approved by the ethical committee of the Department of Veterinary Medicine of the University of Bari, Italy (Prot. Uniba 12/20).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Latrofa, M.S., Varotto-Boccazzi, I., Louzada-Flores, V.N. et al. Interaction between Wolbachia pipientis and Leishmania infantum in heartworm infected dogs. Parasites Vectors 16, 77 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-023-05662-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-023-05662-y

Keywords

Parasites & Vectors

ISSN: 1756-3305

Contact us