Transgenic zebrafish eggs containing bactericidal peptide is a novel food supplement enhancing resistance to pathogenic infection of fish.

Zebrafish (Danio rerio) was used as a bioreactor to produce bovine lactoferricin (LFB), which has wide-ranging antimicrobial activity. We constructed an expression plasmid in which LFB was fused with green fluorescent protein (GFP) and driven by zebrafish beta-actin promoter. After microinjection, six transgenic founders were screened on the basis of GFP appearance. Among them, a stable ZBL-5 line was selected by the ubiquitous and strong expression of GFP. Using PCR and Western blot analysis, we confirmed that the recombinant LFB-GFP protein was produced by the F2 progeny derived from the ZBL-5 line. The bactericidal agar plate assay proved that the functional domain of LFB was released from the LFB-GFP fusion protein, resulting in strong bactericidal activity against Escherichia coli, Edwardsiella tarda and Aeromonas hydrophila. Furthermore, adult zebrafish were given one feeding of fifty 72-hpf transgenic embryos. The treated fish were then immersed in freshwater containing 1 x 10(5) CFU ml(-1)E. tarda for 7 days. The survival rate of the treated zebrafish was significantly higher than that of fish fed with fifty wild-type embryos (75 +/- 12.5% versus 4 +/- 7.2%). This line of evidence suggested that pathogen resistance can be enhanced by using transgenic embryos containing LFB-GFP as a food supplement for fish, while, at the same time, reducing the demand of chemical antibiotics.

The transcription factor Six1a plays an essential role in the craniofacial myogenesis of zebrafish.

Transcription factor Six1a plays important roles in morphogenesis, organogenesis, and cell differentiation. However, the role of Six1a during zebrafish cranial muscle development is still unclear. Here, we demonstrated that Six1a was required for sternohyoideus, medial rectus, inferior rectus, and all pharyngeal arch muscle development. Although Six1a was also necessary for myod and myogenin expression in head muscles, it did not affect myf5 expression in cranial muscles that originate from head mesoderm. Overexpression of myod enabled embryos to rescue all the defects in cranial muscles induced by injection of six1a-morpholino (MO), suggesting that myod is directly downstream of six1a in controlling craniofacial myogenesis. However, overexpression of six1a was unable to rescue arch muscle defects in the tbx1- and myf5-morphants, suggesting that six1a is only involved in myogenic maintenance, not its initiation, during arch muscle myogenesis. Although the craniofacial muscle defects caused by pax3-MO phenocopied those induced by six1a-MO, injection of six1a, myod or myf5 mRNA did not rescue the cranial muscle defects in pax3 morphants, suggesting that six1a and pax3 do not function in the same regulatory network. Therefore, we proposed four putative regulatory pathways to understand how six1a distinctly interacts with either myf5 or myod during zebrafish craniofacial muscle development.