Immune priming in Armadillidium vulgare against Salmonella enterica: direct or indirect costs on life history traits?

Published: 21 March 2022| Version 2 | DOI: 10.17632/gd24nvncvf.2
Cybele Prigot-Maurice


Dataset and statistical script of the article : "Immune priming in Armadillidium vulgare against Salmonella enterica: direct or indirectcosts on life history traits?" Cybèle PRIGOT-MAURICE1*, Charlotte DEPEUX1*, Hélène PAULHAC1, Christine BRAQUART-VARNIER1#, Sophie BELTRAN-BECH1# 1 Université de Poitiers, Laboratoire Ecologie et Biologie des Interactions, UMR CNRS 7267, 5 rue Jacques Fort, 86000 POITIERS, France. * Co-first authors # Co-last authors Contact : Experimental design of the article : Firstly, we performed the priming procedure on three females’ treatments: either primed with low dose of living S. enterica (SAP, for S. enterica-primed), with sterile LB broth (LPB, for LB-primed) or without priming injection (NP, for non-primed; Fig.1). We added a fourth treatment in which the females have never been injected (NI, for non-injected, Control females). We used a total of 123 females, including 33 NP, 33 LBP, 32 SA and 25 NI (Control). 7 days after the priming procedure, SAP, NP and LBP females were injected with a LD50 of S. enterica and their survival rates were monitored for 22 days. Surviving females (NP = 20, LBP = 27, SAP= 26, NI, Control = 25) were weighted and placed onto a box (5x8cm) with one virgin non-injected male of same age. Each pair of individuals were kept on moistened potting mix with linden leaves and carrot slices ad libitum under a stimulating photoperiod (18:6, D/N) at room temperature. Every three days for around 8 months, we monitored survival rates and physiological states of all females by observing their ventral face. The females that were about to lay eggs develop a marsupium following a parturial moult, which is observable under a binocular loupe (Moreau and Rigaud 2002). Once females were ready to deliver their offspring, they were placed alone in a box with soft humid paper. For each female, we counted the number of clutches (one or two), the number of days that they took to produce each clutch (i.e. from the contact with male to the delivery of offspring; or the time between the first and the second clutch), the number of offspring in each clutch and the total number of produced offspring. After the second clutch (when it occurred), we washed the females (0.28% NaClO then water) and measured the viable haemocyte size, viability (% of living cells), and concentration. We dissected the nervous chord to quantify the β-galactosidase activity. Because not all females produced a second clutch, we decided to sample and dissect the females having only one clutch at the same time we did this for the last females producing the second clutch (around 8 months after the beginning of the experiment).



Universite de Poitiers


Crustacea, Cellular Senescence, Immunity, Control of Reproduction, Hemocytes, Priming Treatment