skip to main content

Explore Research Products in the NSF-PAR

  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Aquaculture Reuse Water, Genetic Line, and Vaccination Affect Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Disease Susceptibility and Infection Dynamics
Title: Aquaculture Reuse Water, Genetic Line, and Vaccination Affect Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Disease Susceptibility and Infection Dynamics
Infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) and Flavobacterium psychrophilum are major pathogens of farmed rainbow trout. Improved control strategies are desired but the influence of on-farm environmental factors that lead to disease outbreaks remain poorly understood. Water reuse is an important environmental factor affecting disease. Prior studies have established a replicated outdoor-tank system capable of varying the exposure to reuse water by controlling water flow from commercial trout production raceways. The goal of this research was to evaluate the effect of constant or pulsed reuse water exposure on survival, pathogen prevalence, and pathogen load. Herein, we compared two commercial lines of rainbow trout, Clear Springs Food (CSF) and Troutex (Tx) that were either vaccinated against IHNV with a DNA vaccine or sham vaccinated. Over a 27-day experimental period in constant reuse water, all fish from both lines and treatments, died while mortality in control fish in spring water was <1%. Water reuse exposure, genetic line, vaccination, and the interaction between genetic line and water exposure affected survival ( P <0.05). Compared to all other water sources, fish exposed to constant reuse water had 46- to 710-fold greater risk of death ( P <0.0001). Tx fish had a 2.7-fold greater risk of death compared to CSF fish in constant reuse water ( P ≤ 0.001), while risk of death did not differ in spring water ( P =0.98). Sham-vaccinated fish had 2.1-fold greater risk of death compared to vaccinated fish ( P =0.02). Both IHNV prevalence and load were lower in vaccinated fish compared to sham-vaccinated fish, and unexpectedly, F. psychrophilum load associated with fin/gill tissues from live-sampled fish was lower in vaccinated fish compared to sham-vaccinated fish. As a result, up to forty-five percent of unvaccinated fish were naturally co-infected with F. psychrophilum and IHNV and the coinfected fish exhibited the highest IHNV loads. Under laboratory challenge conditions, co-infection with F. psychrophilum and IHNV overwhelmed IHNV vaccine-induced protection. In summary, we demonstrate that exposure to reuse water or multi-pathogen challenge can initiate complex disease dynamics that can overwhelm both vaccination and host genetic resistance.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1911853
NSF-PAR ID:
10336862
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Frontiers in Immunology
Volume:
12
ISSN:
1664-3224
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al ( , Human Reproduction)
    Abstract STUDY QUESTION

    To what extent is preconception maternal or paternal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination associated with miscarriage incidence?

     SUMMARY ANSWER

    COVID-19 vaccination in either partner at any time before conception is not associated with an increased rate of miscarriage.

     WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

    Several observational studies have evaluated the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and found no association with miscarriage, though no study prospectively evaluated the risk of early miscarriage (gestational weeks [GW] <8) in relation to COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, no study has evaluated the role of preconception vaccination in both male and female partners.

     STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

    An Internet-based, prospective preconception cohort study of couples residing in the USA and Canada. We analyzed data from 1815 female participants who conceived during December 2020–November 2022, including 1570 couples with data on male partner vaccination.

     PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

    Eligible female participants were aged 21–45 years and were trying to conceive without use of fertility treatment at enrollment. Female participants completed questionnaires at baseline, every 8 weeks until pregnancy, and during early and late pregnancy; they could also invite their male partners to complete a baseline questionnaire. We collected data on COVID-19 vaccination (brand and date of doses), history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (yes/no and date of positive test), potential confounders (demographic, reproductive, and lifestyle characteristics), and pregnancy status on all questionnaires. Vaccination status was categorized as never (0 doses before conception), ever (≥1 dose before conception), having a full primary sequence before conception, and completing the full primary sequence ≤3 months before conception. These categories were not mutually exclusive. Participants were followed up from their first positive pregnancy test until miscarriage or a censoring event (induced abortion, ectopic pregnancy, loss to follow-up, 20 weeks’ gestation), whichever occurred first. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for miscarriage and corresponding 95% CIs using Cox proportional hazards models with GW as the time scale. We used propensity score fine stratification weights to adjust for confounding.

     MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

    Among 1815 eligible female participants, 75% had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine by the time of conception. Almost one-quarter of pregnancies resulted in miscarriage, and 75% of miscarriages occurred <8 weeks’ gestation. The propensity score-weighted IRR comparing female participants who received at least one dose any time before conception versus those who had not been vaccinated was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.14). COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with increased risk of either early miscarriage (GW: <8) or late miscarriage (GW: 8–19). There was no indication of an increased risk of miscarriage associated with male partner vaccination (IRR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.56, 1.44).

     LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

    The present study relied on self-reported vaccination status and infection history. Thus, there may be some non-differential misclassification of exposure status. While misclassification of miscarriage is also possible, the preconception cohort design and high prevalence of home pregnancy testing in this cohort reduced the potential for under-ascertainment of miscarriage. As in all observational studies, residual or unmeasured confounding is possible.

     WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

    This is the first study to evaluate prospectively the relation between preconception COVID-19 vaccination in both partners and miscarriage, with more complete ascertainment of early miscarriages than earlier studies of vaccination. The findings are informative for individuals planning a pregnancy and their healthcare providers.

     STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

    This work was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute of Health [R01-HD086742 (PI: L.A.W.); R01-HD105863S1 (PI: L.A.W. and M.L.E.)], the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R03-AI154544; PI: A.K.R.), and the National Science Foundation (NSF-1914792; PI: L.A.W.). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. L.A.W. is a fibroid consultant for AbbVie, Inc. She also receives in-kind donations from Swiss Precision Diagnostics (Clearblue home pregnancy tests) and Kindara.com (fertility apps). M.L.E. received consulting fees from Ro, Hannah, Dadi, VSeat, and Underdog, holds stock in Ro, Hannah, Dadi, and Underdog, is a past president of SSMR, and is a board member of SMRU. K.F.H. reports being an investigator on grants to her institution from UCB and Takeda, unrelated to this study. S.H.-D. reports being an investigator on grants to her institution from Takeda, unrelated to this study, and a methods consultant for UCB and Roche for unrelated drugs. The authors report no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

     TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

    N/A.

     
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ( , Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology)
    Abstract Background

    COVID-19 disproportionately affects those with preexisting conditions, but little research has determined whether those with chronic diseases view the pandemic itself differently - and whether there are differences between chronic diseases. We theorized that while individuals with respiratory disease or autoimmune disorders would perceive greater threat from COVID-19 and be more supportive of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), those with autoimmune disorders would be less likely to support vaccination-based interventions.

     Methods

    We conducted a two-wave online survey conducted in February and November 2021 asking respondents their beliefs about COVID-19 risk perception, adoption and support of interventions, willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and reasons for vaccination. Regression analysis was conducted to assess the relationship of respondents reporting a chronic disease and COVID-19 behaviors and attitudes, compared to healthy respondents adjusting for demographic and political factors.

     Results

    In the initial survey, individuals reporting a chronic disease had both stronger feelings of risk from COVID-19 as well as preferences for NPIs than healthy controls. The only NPI that was still practiced significantly more compared to healthy controls in the resample was limiting trips outside of the home. Support for community-level NPIs was higher among individuals reporting a chronic disease than healthy controls and remained high among those with respiratory diseases in sample 2. Vaccine acceptance produced more divergent results: those reporting chronic respiratory diseases were 6% more willing to be vaccinated than healthy controls, while we found no significant difference between individuals with autoimmune diseases and healthy controls. Respondents with chronic respiratory disease and those with autoimmune diseases were more likely to want to be vaccinated to protect themselves from COVID-19, and those with an autoimmune disease were more likely to report fear of a bad vaccine reaction as the reason for vaccine hesitancy. In the resample, neither those with respiratory diseases nor autoimmune diseases reported being more willing to receive a booster vaccine than healthy controls.

     Conclusions

    It is not enough to recognize the importance of health in determining attitudes: nuanced differences between conditions must also be recognized.

     
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ( , PLOS Medicine)
    Low, Nicola (Ed.)
    Background While booster vaccinations clearly reduce the risk of severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and death, the impact of boosters on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections has not been fully characterized: Doing so requires understanding their impact on asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic infections that often go unreported but nevertheless play an important role in spreading SARS-CoV-2. We sought to estimate the impact of COVID-19 booster doses on SARS-CoV-2 infections in a vaccinated population of young adults during an Omicron BA.1-predominant period. Methods and findings We implemented a cohort study of young adults in a college environment (Cornell University’s Ithaca campus) from a period when Omicron BA.1 was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant on campus (December 5 to December 31, 2021). Participants included 15,800 university students who completed initial vaccination series with vaccines approved by the World Health Organization for emergency use, were enrolled in mandatory at-least-weekly surveillance polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, and had no positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test within 90 days before the start of the study period. Robust multivariable Poisson regression with the main outcome of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was performed to compare those who completed their initial vaccination series and a booster dose to those without a booster dose. A total of 1,926 unique SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified in the study population. Controlling for sex, student group membership, date of completion of initial vaccination series, initial vaccine type, and temporal effect during the study period, our analysis estimates that receiving a booster dose further reduces the rate of having a PCR-detected SARS-CoV-2 infection relative to an initial vaccination series by 56% (95% confidence interval [42%, 67%], P < 0.001). While most individuals had recent booster administration before or during the study period (a limitation of our study), this result is robust to the assumed delay over which a booster dose becomes effective (varied from 1 day to 14 days). The mandatory active surveillance approach used in this study, under which 86% of the person-days in the study occurred, reduces the likelihood of outcome misclassification. Key limitations of our methodology are that we did not have an a priori protocol or statistical analysis plan because the analysis was initially done for institutional research purposes, and some analysis choices were made after observing the data. Conclusions We observed that boosters are effective, relative to completion of initial vaccination series, in further reducing the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infections in a college student population during a period when Omicron BA.1 was predominant; booster vaccinations for this age group may play an important role in reducing incidence of COVID-19. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ( , Ecology)
    Abstract

    Disease dynamics are governed by variation of individuals, species, and environmental conditions across space and time. In some cases, an alternate reservoir host amplifies pathogen loads and drives disease transmission to less competent hosts in a process called pathogen spillover. Spillover is frequently associated with multi‐host disease systems where a single species is more tolerant of infection and more competent in pathogen transmission compared to other hosts. Pathogen spillover must be driven by biotic factors, including host and community characteristics, yet biotic factors interact with the abiotic environment (e.g., temperature) to create disease. Despite its fundamental role in disease dynamics, the influence of the abiotic environment on pathogen spillover has seldom been examined. Improving our understanding of disease processes such as pathogen spillover hinges on disentangling the effects of interrelated biotic and abiotic factors over space and time. We applied 10 yr of fine‐scale microclimate, disease, and tree community data in a path analysis to investigate the relative influence of biotic and abiotic factors on pathogen spillover for the emerging infectious forest disease sudden oak death (SOD). Disease transmission inSODis primarily driven by the reservoir host California bay laurel, which supports high foliar pathogen loads that spillover onto neighboring oak trees and create lethal canker infections. The foliar pathogen load and susceptibility of oaks is expected to be sensitive to forest microclimate conditions. We found that biotic factors of pathogen load and tree diversity had relatively stronger effects on pathogen spillover compared to abiotic microclimate factors, with pathogen load increasing oak infection and tree diversity reducing oak infection. Abiotic factors still had significant effects, with greater heat exposure during summer months reducing pathogen loads and optimal pathogen conditions during the wet season increasing oak infection. Our results offer clues to possible disease dynamics under future climate change where hotter and drier or warmer and wetter conditions could have opposing effects on pathogen spillover in theSODsystem. Disentangling direct and indirect effects of biotic and abiotic factors affecting disease processes can provide key insights into disease dynamics including potential avenues for reducing disease spread and predicting future epidemics.

     
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ( , Journal of The Royal Society Interface)
    Environmental pathogen surveillance is a sensitive tool that can detect early-stage outbreaks, and it is being used to track poliovirus and other pathogens. However, interpretation of longitudinal environmental surveillance signals is difficult because the relationship between infection incidence and viral load in wastewater depends on time-varying shedding intensity. We developed a mathematical model of time-varying poliovirus shedding intensity consistent with expert opinion across a range of immunization states. Incorporating this shedding model into an infectious disease transmission model, we analysed quantitative, polymerase chain reaction data from seven sites during the 2013 Israeli poliovirus outbreak. Compared to a constant shedding model, our time-varying shedding model estimated a slower peak (four weeks later), with more of the population reached by a vaccination campaign before infection and a lower cumulative incidence. We also estimated the population shed virus for an average of 29 days (95% CI 28–31), longer than expert opinion had suggested for a population that was purported to have received three or more inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) doses. One explanation is that IPV may not substantially affect shedding duration. Using realistic models of time-varying shedding coupled with longitudinal environmental surveillance may improve our understanding of outbreak dynamics of poliovirus, SARS-CoV-2, or other pathogens. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email