The challenges faced by living stock collections in the USA

  1. Kevin McCluskey
  2. Kyria Boundy-Mills
  3. Greg Dye
  4. Erin Ehmke
  5. Gregg Gunnell
  6. Hippokratis Kiaris
  7. Maxi Polihronakis Richmond
  8. Anne D Yoder
  9. Daniel R Zeigler
  10. Sarah Zehr
  11. Erich Grotewold  Is a corresponding author
  1. Kansas State University, United States
  2. University of California, Davis, United States
  3. Duke University, United States
  4. University of South Carolina, United States
  5. University of California, San Diego, United States
  6. The Ohio State University, United States

Abstract

Many discoveries in the life sciences have been made using material from living stock collections. These collections provide a uniform and stable supply of living organisms and related materials that enhance the reproducibility of research and minimize the need for repetitive calibration. While collections differ in many ways, they all require expertise in maintaining living organisms and good logistical systems for keeping track of stocks and fulfilling requests for specimens. Here, we review some of the contributions made by living stock collections to research across all branches of the tree of life, and outline the challenges they face.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kevin McCluskey

    Fungal Genetics Stock Center, Kansas State University, Manhattan, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Kyria Boundy-Mills

    Phaff Yeast Culture Collection, Food Science and Technology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Greg Dye

    Duke Lemur Center, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Erin Ehmke

    Duke Lemur Center, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gregg Gunnell

    Duke Lemur Center, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Hippokratis Kiaris

    Department of Drug Discovery and Biomedical Sciences, University of South Carolina, Columbia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Maxi Polihronakis Richmond

    Drosophila Species Stock Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Anne D Yoder

    Duke Lemur Center, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Daniel R Zeigler

    Bacillus Genetics Stock Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sarah Zehr

    Duke Lemur Center, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Erich Grotewold

    Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, United States
    For correspondence
    Grotewold.1@osu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4720-7290

Funding

National Science Foundation (DBI-1642534)

  • Anne D Yoder

National Science Foundation (DBI-1534564)

  • Kevin McCluskey

National Science Foundation (DBI-1561210)

  • Erich Grotewold

National Science Foundation (DBI-1351502)

  • Maxi Polihronakis Richmond

National Science Foundation (DBI-1561691)

  • Erich Grotewold

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2017, McCluskey et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,417
    views
  • 277
    downloads
  • 7
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Kevin McCluskey
  2. Kyria Boundy-Mills
  3. Greg Dye
  4. Erin Ehmke
  5. Gregg Gunnell
  6. Hippokratis Kiaris
  7. Maxi Polihronakis Richmond
  8. Anne D Yoder
  9. Daniel R Zeigler
  10. Sarah Zehr
  11. Erich Grotewold
(2017)
The challenges faced by living stock collections in the USA
eLife 6:e24611.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.24611
  1. Further reading

Further reading

    1. Medicine
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Berit Siedentop, Viacheslav N Kachalov ... Sebastian Bonhoeffer
    Research Article

    Background:

    Under which conditions antibiotic combination therapy decelerates rather than accelerates resistance evolution is not well understood. We examined the effect of combining antibiotics on within-patient resistance development across various bacterial pathogens and antibiotics.

    Methods:

    We searched CENTRAL, EMBASE, and PubMed for (quasi)-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published from database inception to 24 November 2022. Trials comparing antibiotic treatments with different numbers of antibiotics were included. Patients were considered to have acquired resistance if, at the follow-up culture, a resistant bacterium (as defined by the study authors) was detected that had not been present in the baseline culture. We combined results using a random effects model and performed meta-regression and stratified analyses. The trials’ risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool.

    Results:

    42 trials were eligible and 29, including 5054 patients, qualified for statistical analysis. In most trials, resistance development was not the primary outcome and studies lacked power. The combined odds ratio for the acquisition of resistance comparing the group with the higher number of antibiotics with the comparison group was 1.23 (95% CI 0.68–2.25), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I2=77%). We identified tentative evidence for potential beneficial or detrimental effects of antibiotic combination therapy for specific pathogens or medical conditions.

    Conclusions:

    The evidence for combining a higher number of antibiotics compared to fewer from RCTs is scarce and overall compatible with both benefit or harm. Trials powered to detect differences in resistance development or well-designed observational studies are required to clarify the impact of combination therapy on resistance.

    Funding:

    Support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant 310030B_176401 (SB, BS, CW), grant 32FP30-174281 (ME), grant 324730_207957 (RDK)) and from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID, cooperative agreement AI069924 (ME)) is gratefully acknowledged.

    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Vera Vollenweider, Karoline Rehm ... Rolf Kümmerli
    Research Article

    The global rise of antibiotic resistance calls for new drugs against bacterial pathogens. A common approach is to search for natural compounds deployed by microbes to inhibit competitors. Here, we show that the iron-chelating pyoverdines, siderophores produced by environmental Pseudomonas spp., have strong antibacterial properties by inducing iron starvation and growth arrest in pathogens. A screen of 320 natural Pseudomonas isolates used against 12 human pathogens uncovered several pyoverdines with particularly high antibacterial properties and distinct chemical characteristics. The most potent pyoverdine effectively reduced growth of the pathogens Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus in a concentration- and iron-dependent manner. Pyoverdine increased survival of infected Galleria mellonella host larvae and showed low toxicity for the host, mammalian cell lines, and erythrocytes. Furthermore, experimental evolution of pathogens combined with whole-genome sequencing revealed limited resistance evolution compared to an antibiotic. Thus, pyoverdines from environmental strains have the potential to become a new class of sustainable antibacterials against specific human pathogens.