Declines in large wildlife lead to increases in disease risk

        As we know, every animal and plant in the ecosystem has an effect on it. Even the smallest fly plays a huge role. Well this little fly is contributing to the deaths and declines of many large wildlife. The location of this occurrence is primarily in East Africa.  In the research by Hillary Young, she explains that fleas have always been contributors to spreading diseases. Since the middle ages, fleas that were carried by rats were responsible  for spreading the black plague. Today these fleas are vectors of plague and many other diseases; such as Bartonellosis, which is potentially dangerous to the human population. The number of death tolls in wildlife have been increasing and this puts humans at risk of infection. 

http://wallpaperswa.com

        Why this huge spike in fleas? Well, as more and more large animals are dying; rodents are thriving, because they are not being haunted by another animal. These rodent carry around fleas that are infected with Bartonellosis. Bartonellosis is, “a group of bacterial pathogens which can cause endocarditis, spleen and liver damage and memory loss.” This pathogen affects both the animals and humans and can have some pretty devastating consequences.

        The problem with rodents is that they reproduce extremely fast and with no animal to kill them, they are just overpopulated; spreading diseases quickly. This pathogens are being spread to elephants, zebras and many more animals. Its sad, because many of these animals are already endangered and by making their habitats even more dangerous isn't helping them. Something needs to be done about this problem, because its not only affecting these animals but us as well.

        The author of this article did a very good job at explaining this new finding and how it can affect us. It was very easy to understand and clear. The author did not seem bias, he was just stating facts. I do wish he would have mentioned what could we do to put a stop to this problem. Is there a solution? What can be done?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140429142201.htm

Cow manure harbors diverse new antibiotic resistance genes

Who knew that we could be getting antibiotic resistant genes from cow manure. Well the findings, reported in mBio®, which is an online open-access journal of the American Society for Microbiology, reported that cow manure could be a potential source for new types of antibiotic resistance genes. 

Cow manure has antibiotic resistance genes

This happens in a very simple process. First the cow does its business. Then this manure gets taken to fields and used as a fertilizer. The new types of antibiotic resistance genes then transfer to bacteria in the soil, where the food is grown and this food ends up on our tables. 

So far thousands of antibiotic resistance genes have been identified, such as E. coli. This could be dangerous, because in a hospital scenario a virus that becomes resistant is not good and can cause lots of trouble, including death. For the most part these antibiotic resistant genes aren't harmful in fact they can help us by boosting up our immune system. But research is being done to understand and prevent these antibiotic resistance genes from entering hospital or clinics. "We're hoping this study will open up a larger field of surveillance, to start looking at new types of resistance before they show up in the clinic," says Handelsman.

As we have learned in microbiology, bacteria is adapting and becoming resistant very rapidly to many of our antibiotics, to the point that they aren’t working anymore. This article shows how important the research for antibiotic resistance genes is, because we need to do something about these resistant bacterias. 

The author did a very good job at explaining the new discovery of cow manure having antibiotic resistance genes. This is groundbreaking, because perhaps other animals that we eat also have antibiotic resistance genes. All this animals could be contributing to a super bacteria. (antibiotic resistance genes bacteria)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140422084928.htm

Hide and seek: Revealing camouflaged bacteria

        We know how dangerous some bacteria is and how harmful they can be. One of them being Salmonella, which is a bacterial pathogen that can kill in extreme cases. Salmonella was discovered in the late 1800's, and more then 40,000 people get it every year. Did you know that Salmonella has camouflaging bacterium? Bacteria have developed countless strategies to hide themselves in order to survive attacks by the immune system. This strategy consists of Salmonella bacteria hiding within the cytoplasm of a macrophage, hiding there they can not be detected by immune cells. This helps the Salmonella bacterial pathogens multiply with no risk of being killed. 

Salmonella Hiding 

        Thankfully to the research team of Biozentrum at the University of Basel, a protein family that plays a central role in the fight against the bacterial pathogen Salmonella that hides within the cells has been discovered by the researchers. This protein family is called interferon-induced GTPases, they reveal and eliminate the bacterium's camouflage in the cell, which enables the immune cells to recognize the pathogen and to destroy it. 

        The author of this article is trying to inform us on this new discovery that could be groundbreaking to other bacteria pathogens as well. He does a really good job at explaining the benefits of the new GTPases and how helpful they are. This new discovery could even help us find new bacteria that have been hiding in cells or even in space. It really ties in with new ways to find bacteria. I never would have thought that bacteria like Salmonella was a hiding pathogen. Perhaps this new research could even cure more sickness and disease, that we don’t know how to treat.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140416133338.htm

Sea otters can get the flu, too

Sea Otters are susceptible to human viruses

        It turns out Sea otters can get the flu as well. According to a new study, by the U.S. Geological Survey and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study showed that, Northern Sea otters living off the coast of Washington state were infected with the same H1N1 flu virus that caused the world-wide pandemic in 2009. The researchers discovered antibodies for the 2009 H1N1 flu virus in blood samples from 70 percent of the sea otters studied. The Sea otters were not visibly sick, but the presences of antibodies in their system means they were exposed to it. 

        Although the researches are not certain when the otters were infected or how they do know now that human flu can infect sea otters. They also know that the antibiotics that were produced by the Sea otters are specific only to the H1N1 flu virus.  

        But Sea otters aren't the only marine mammals that are susceptible to the flu. In 2010 a study showed that northern elephant seals had also been infected by the H1N1 virus.

       Researchers are now trying to find out how these animals came into reach of this flu and what other viruses have they picked up. 

       This new discovery really peaks my interest, because the H1N1 flu was huge and dangerous, but somehow this marine mammal was able to produce an antibiotic against it. Perhaps we should look into this for alternative antibiotics.    

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140408213619.htm

Deforestation of sandy soils a greater climate threat

    When we think of deforestation the last thing we think about is the soil. It turns out that deforestation disturbs underground microbial communities in the soil that regulate the loss of carbon into the atmosphere. According to new research led by Yale University scientists, deforestation may have far greater consequences for climate change then we thought. the consequence vary from soil to soil and it depends almost exclusively on the texture of the soil. 

Deforestation more dangerous then we thought

        When deforestation happens serious consequences begin to happen. One of them being extensive loss of carbon from the soil. This carbon is usually retained by subterranean microbes that need the trees to survive and thrive. Once these trees are taken out the microbes begin to die and CO2 is released into the air, but not all soil textures react the same way.

        Thomas Crowther who is a postdoctoral fellow at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies said that, “Texture overrode the effects of all the other variables that we thought might be important, including temperature, moisture, nutrient concentrations, and soil pH.” For example deforestation dramatically affects sandy soils, but it has minimal effects in muddy, clay-like soils, even after extensive tree removal. This is due to particles in clay like soil that have access to a larger area to bind nutrients and water. This means that soil texture that has mud or clay can do fine without trees for a very long time, but soil textures that are sandy will quickly become uninhabitable to microbes. 

        With this new information deforestation companies can take more precautions on where to cut down trees or not, due to the texture of the soil. Because we now live in a world where global warming is a serious issue these precautions have to be taken. We don’t want any more CO2 in the air then what we already have.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140401162203.htm

Pathogens in cheese: Case study on Austrian curd cheese

This Cheese is actually made with bacteria 

Next time someone offers you cheese, think twice. In 2009 and 2010 two different strains of the bacterium Listeria monocytogenes, were found in cheese that got 34 people infected and killed 8. Experts from the University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna analyzed the the outbreak strains. They where able to show that the strains displayed distinct properties and that they had entered the food independently. This shows that if food products are not produced in a hygienic environment, people who consume these foods can put their lives in danger. 

These cases are rare, but when they do happen they are mortal. In fact they have the highest mortality rate out of all food-borne illnesses.

One of the pathogens responsible for the illnesses was the L. monocytogenes strain. This strain is very effective at infecting epithelial cells of the intestine and liver cells. It is also extremely invase. The second  L. monocytogenes pathogen strain was particularly successful at infecting macrophages, important immune system cells. leaving the immune system weak and easy to attack. Between these two strains they got 34 people sick and killed 8. 

I know that I will be more careful with food now, especially dairy products. This makes me think how clean is our food. I mean, the fruit we eat is gathered by somebody’s hands and the meat we eat is butchered by somebody’s hands as well. We are practically putting our lives in their hands. If they don't wash their hands or maintain our food in proper hygiene conditions we can get really sick. It’s crazy to think about how something so small that you cant see with the naked eye, can get us really sick to the point of death. It always amazes me how we live day by day without thinking of micro bacteria, which is a world with in itself and can be found everywhere.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140321112256.htm

5 Second Rule!

        We have all heard about the five second rule, but is it True? It turns out that food that is picked up within five seconds or less is less likely to contain bacteria then if it were left for long periods of time. This research was carried out at Aston University's School of Life and Health Sciences.

5 Second Rule

        A team of final year Biology students, led by Anthony Hilton, Professor of Microbiology set out to find if this myth was true or not. They monitored the transfer of the bacteria E. coli and Staphylococcus aureus from indoor floor types such as carpet, laminate, and tile to toast, pasta and a sticky sweet. The time varied from 3 to 30 seconds.

        The results confirmed the 5 second rule myth. They also found out that flooring plays a pretty big role. Carpet was less likely to transfer bacteria, but laminate and tile were very quick at transferring bacteria. They also carried out a survey to see how many people follow this 5 second rule. The survey showed that 87% of people follow the 5 second rule and out of those 87%; 55% are women.

        Professor Hilton summarized this research by saying, "Consuming food dropped on the floor still carries an infection risk as it very much depends on which bacteria are present on the floor at the time; however the findings of this study will bring some light relief to those who have been employing the five-second rule for years, despite a general consensus that it is purely a myth. We have found evidence that transfer from indoor flooring surfaces is incredibly poor with carpet actually posing the lowest risk of bacterial transfer onto dropped food."

        This research really makes me happy, because I usually follow the five second rule, but only in my house. The research also helps us understand microbes a little bit better, because we know now that it takes time for microbes to transfer to places and different conditions allow them to move faster. I also find it interesting that the floor plays a big role on whether you get bacteria in your food or not.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/03/140310102212.htm