Effects of salmonid fish viruses on Mx gene expression and resistance to single or dual viral infections

We examined the ability of several fish viruses to induce protection against homologous or heterologous viruses in single or double infections, and assessed whether such protection is correlated with innate immunity or expression of the Mx gene. Monolayers of BF2 cells pre-treated with supernatants of brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) macrophage cultures that had been stimulated with either polyinosinic polycytidylic acid (poly I:C) or viruses, such as infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV), infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) or a mixture of the two, showed varying degrees of protection against viral infections. The virus showing the strongest induction was IPNV, and the antiviral activity against IHNV was also high: around 6 log10 reduction of virus yield. Consequently, the IPNV–IHNV co-infection yield was also reduced by varying amounts. In vivo, the cumulative mortality observed in the IPNV–IHNV co-infected fish was always less than that in those with a single infection. Stimulation with poly I:C for 7 days significantly reduced cumulative mortality in single-infected fish, but not in the double-infected, in which the IPNV was the only virus isolated from moribund animals. By RT–PCR, Mx was expressed in all the organ samples tested (kidney, liver and spleen) from virus-stimulated fish at 1, 2 and 3 days. By qRT–PCR the extent and timing of Mx expression was shown to differ in the poly I:C and the single or dual viral infections. The highest increase in Mx expression (21.6-fold above basal levels) occurred (after 24 h) in fish infected with the IHNV, and expression remained high until day 7. Mx expression in fish infected with IPNV peaked later, at 2 days post infection, and also remained high until day 7. The dual infection with IPNV–IHNV induced high Mx expression on day 1, which peaked on day 2 and remained high until day 7. These results indicate that activation of the immune system could explain the interference and loss of IHNV in the IPNV–IHNV co-infections.