Talk:Borrelia burgdorferi

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 21 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Teall7273.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sarahgoodnight.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Refs
it may be a problem with the ref's. i am going to change them to weblinks and see if it works

Nope, no dice. damn the internet gods for this one

In case anyone is interested in this painfully boring subject, here are the links to the cited journal articles:

1.) Byram

2.) Fikrig

3.) Girchick

I dont know if they are public, I access them through a library account. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frederickmercury (talk • contribs).

Some mistakes
First of all, the one who wrote this article forgot to mention that this is a GRAM NEGATIVE bacteria.


 * According to Brock Biology of Microorganisms p 479, B. burgdorferi is a GRAM POSITIVE bacteria.  Bonemeal (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Second, after you call it a bacteria, you call it an "obligate parasite". Pathogenic bacterias are BY THIER DEFINITION parsitic microorganisms. Another thing, you said that Borrelia burgdorferi " is incapable of surviving outside of a host", but this is wrong, as Borelias can be easyly grown on the "Kelly medium" read here or on any other mediums enriched with somatic cells (limfoid, epitelial, etc.). PS: Sorry for my grammar mistakes, but enlgish is not my native tongue.--Diurpaneu 14:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * If you see something wrong in the article, be bold and fix it yourself. That's why the edit button's there. :) As for your grammar mistakes, I've seen a lot worse from people whose native language is English. Pyrospirit  Flames  Fire 15:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I tried to. But when I press "Save page" it loads for around 5 minutes, then gives me some error. I`ll try again later.--Diurpaneu 16:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I edited the page. It works now :) I changed that phrase and changed the referance, and also added that it`s a Gram negative bacteria. Diurpaneu 17:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

CDC and Lyme disease
"and because the CDC continues to insist that tick bites are the cause, then mainstream medicine remains skeptical. Some believe that the cyst form can lay dormant for months or years, and is easily missed in typical blood tests, and why normal cultures fail."

What is it that the CDC continues to insist? I'm pretty sure they've accepted that Lyme disease exists and is caused by Borrelia. ZZYZX 06:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

And there is no cyst form of this organism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.29.32 (talk) 01:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

This page does not mention the distinguishing characteristics of the bacteria such as having a linear chromosome or an endo flagella which is a crucial virulence factor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.56.171.74 (talk) 15:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Merging into Lyme_disease_microbiology
User:Fredweis deleted most of the content and said it was "replaced" with Lyme_disease_microbiology (which had existed before), but much of the content never made it over to the other page. I'll fix that now. 75.41.71.106 15:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Endospores
someone should add that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.189.55.65 (talk) 21:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Integrated "Glen Burch" note, moved from head of page
I am a non-medical person addressing comments to this article's authors (also the article on Lyme Disease). The information I reviewed seemed somewhat dated in several respects. There was no mention of Bb's various OTHER forms: L-form or cell wall deficient, and spore. Also its ability to mask itself behind biofilms and to drill itself into host cells. On the diagnosis side, I saw no reference to a CD-57 blood count. In Feb 2010 my pain doctor (an MD), upon my complaint of lack of responsiveness to his prolotherapy, and my mention of a tick bite in July 2008 followed by a symptomatic period in Sep 2008, concluded that I had Lyme Disease with a co-infection of Bartonellosis (due to my plantar fasciitis symptoms). He ordered a Western Blot and CD-57 test. The test lab ignored both orders and delivered up an ELISA for Lyme, which of course tested negative at that late date. I had to insist on the retest for CD-57, which I had learned from a web-site would indicate a Lyme infection if under 60. My count was 37, confirming my doctor's very confident diagnosis. My treatment MD uses alternative diagnostic and treatment techniques. LD and 4 other co-infections were confirmed by resonance testing using an Avatar machine - according to the principles of Electro-Acupuncture according to Voll (EAV).

There appears to be research indicating Bb's ability to infect macrophages and fibroblasts, the latter explaining my non-responsiveness to prolotherapy. LD is also called a "great imitator" and some of this aspect was covered in the Lyme article. In my case LD (and possibly its co-infections) are manifesting as adrenal exhaustion and hypothyroidism, both of which may have been borderline before the infection. My pain doctor warned me that these infections would go after old injuries, and only recently I have begun manifesting plantar fasciitis in my "good" foot - a sign that Bartonellosis is still alive and well in me.

I humbly request that one or more of the contributors to these articles research these matters and bring the articles up-to-date. I realize that this "story" is far from over at this point in 2010. Thank you,

Glen Burch —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glen.burch (talk contribs) 15:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Gram staining protocol
"Borrelia burgdorferi is gram negative only by default because safranin is the last dye used, but in reality spirochetes are not classified as either gram positive or negative." This sentence starts with too much detail for an encyclopedia, and ends by indicating that the sentence itself is irrelevant to the article. I'm deleting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.95.203.93 (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't delete information out of Wikipedia without improving the article. Please do some research and change it, otherwise don't do edits, thx. --178.197.229.27 (talk) 12:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Borrelia burgdorferi [about possible association with PCBC lymphoma]
Greetings! I noticed that reverted some edits that I made to Borrelia burgdorferi. References 4 and 5 document the consensus of researchers with reliable, high quality medical references that this pathogen is oncogenic and an infectious cause of cancer. Providing two important wikilinks to more information on this bacteria is appropriate. Best Regards,  Bfpage &#124;leave a message 20:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Neither reference claims that B. burgdorferi causes cancer. The only claim is that Lyme Borrelia has been detected in a small number of cases of cutaneous lymphomas, and only in Europe. Borrelia have not been detected in U.S. or Asian cases of cutaneous lymphomas, even though Lyme disease is endemic in those areas.  The presence of Lyme bacteria in a few lymphomas is not proof of causation.  Another issue is that the assays used to detect the spirochete in the studies described by the secondary sources do not differentiate among the three main Lyme disease bacteria:  B. burgdorferi sensu stricto, B. garinii, and B. afzelii.  This implies that the reviews are talking about B. burgdorferi sensu lato (all 3 species) since it is not clear whether one, two, or all three species have been found in these lymphomas.  This Wikipedia article is about B. burgdorferi sensu stricto.  There are separate articles about the other two species that cause Lyme disease.  The Lyme disease microbiology article, which encompasses all three Lyme species, would be a better location to describe the possible association of Lyme bacteria with cutaneous lymphoma.  CatPath (talk) 01:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Bravo Cat. I made the a thorough, careful edit to the Bb text regarding association with lymphoma, please read it, and then this, and make any further touchup edits you see fit. Personally, I feel your expert comments on the sensu alto issue should also appear in text, but could not find this argument made in refereed literature. (Are you aware of this having been stated? Are you writing it up?)


 * Note, others, that the edit was made because the only review source that I could identify on the Bb oncogenesis discussion closes its only relevant section on the Bb-lymphoma association by saying,""Unlike gastric MALT [mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue] lymphoma, only a few cases of PCBCL [primary cutaneous B-cell lymphoma] have responded to antibiotics (42, 57, 91, 141, 166, 206) [which, cf. H. pylori, diminishes a case for causation]. As in the case of C. psittaci and ocular adnexal MALT lymphoma, if  B. burgdorferi is truly associated with PCBCL, then there is wide geographic variability and other factors are probably involved." Emphasis added to "if". Source: See Chang & Parsonnet 2010,, p. 846, accessed 19 June 2015."


 * Bottom line, correlation is not causation, and there is no clear unequivocal preponderant expert opinion for an unqualified statement even of association (Chang & Parsonnet's statement is qualified), and so there is no support from this apparent best source to date for a broad conclusion that Bb as a "pathogen is oncogenic and an infectious cause of cancer" (as appeared in a Talk discussion on this issue). We must take very great care in areas such as cancer, to state just what the experts state, and only that. We are not allowed, or in this case, qualified to do more. Extrapolation by the inexpert is a source of disinformation, and the web has enough of this already. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 20:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * LeProf, thank you for your edits in response to my concerns. I realized later that I should not have mentioned the sensu lato issue since it's original research on my part.  It also detracts from the more important issue of improperly claiming Bb is oncogenic.  CatPath (talk) 00:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Refs
I was thinking about contributing these references to Borrelia burgdorferi. Any suggestions on their content/validity etc

Ramamoorthi, N. 2005. The Lyme disease agent exploits a tick protein to infect the mammalian host. Nature. 436: 573-577.

Reference: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7050/abs/nature03812.html

Hoen, A.G, Margos, G. 2009. Phylogeography of Borrelia burgdorferi in the eastern United States reflects multiple independent Lyme disease emergence events. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 106: 15013-15018.

Reference: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/35/15013.full

Parola, P. 2001. Ticks and Tickborne Bacterial diseases in humans: an emerging infectious threat. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 32: 987-928.

Reference: http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/32/6/897.short — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheungd (talk • contribs) 01:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Cheungd. In general, you should cite scientific review articles from high-quality sources rather than primary research articles. (Also see this link: ).  The first two papers that you selected are primary sources.  The last paper is a secondary source, but it's old.  Whatever you wanted to add from the review article may be out of date.  You may want to search for a review article in PubMed by clicking on this link: .  CatPath (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Edits
I added some information to the pathophysiology section, and edited some grammar. This is a really good article! This is for a class, so feel free to add/edit any information! Anon330 (talk) 21:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions
I made some grammatical errors and moved some information around. There was good information on the genetic basis of evolution in this organism. There was heavy background on the sequencing of the genome but could use more about the evolution in fitness of the organism. Try looking into articles about the genus Borrelia and its evolutionary timeline. You can even look into the family of Spurochaetaceae. Also do some research into how mutations and gene truncation has contributed to the parasite method of Borrelia burgdorferi. Spreetycakes (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

suggestions
I made some grammatical errors and moved some information around. There was good information on the genetic basis of evolution in this organism. There was heavy background on the sequencing of the genome but could use more about the evolution in fitness of the organism. Try looking into articles about the genus Borrelia and its evolutionary timeline. You can even look into the family of Spurochaetaceae. Also do some research into how mutations and gene truncation has contributed to the parasite method of Borrelia burgdorferi Spreetycakes (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

response to suggestions
Anon330 (talk Going back to the pathophysiology section, however, I noticed that there was a lackluster amount of evidence and data regarding the pathophysiology of Lyme disease and B. Burgdorferi. Naturally I added more information regarding how B. Burgdorferi actually affects a human (changing glycoproteins and proteases, creating an inflammatory response and interacting with specific cells and extracellular proteins in the body). Additionally, I moved the information regarding “iron-sulfur cluster enzymes” because it was originally placed in the pathology section. This information provides no relevant information to pathology and, if anything, can contribute to why the bacteria may act pathophysiologically. I did the same for the information regarding the “seven plasminogen binding proteins.

Spreetycakes (talk Grammar errors and movements were taken into account. As per request, I looking into the fitness of the organism and how certain factors could have affected the evolutionary timeline. That being said, I found a reference that detailed the evolutionary history of B. Burgdorferi and found information regarding the effects of balanced selection on B. Burgdorferi. The article detailed 2 main models: the negative frequency dependent selection and multiple niche polymorphism. I added both of these and spoke of them in regards to B. burgdorferi. Unfortunately, I was unable to find any citable or reliable information regarding Spurochaetaceae related to B. Burgdorferi. As for mutations and gene truncations, I couldn’t find much material. Do you have any suggestions for articles, spreetycakes?

In regards to my professor's comments I did my best to cut down as much wordiness as possible throughout the Wikipedia page, hopefully, I caught most of them. I ended up deleting the claim I made earlier because I did not find strong enough evidence, and I do believe it was a “name-drop”. However I ended up adding a lot more information on pathophysiology and balancing selection factors that have more appropriate conclusions. Cheungd (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:56, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Response to Balanced Selection Section: Emiliaromagna1 (talk) 07:03, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It might be helpful to define what exactly what balanced selection first so that discussion of the variation of this can then be made more clear.
 * It also might be helpful to explain more clearly what you mean by variant. Are variants individual organisms or specific traits that define an organism? This would also help to make the definition of negative frequency-dependent selection much more clear and understandable.
 * I made subheadings for negative frequency-dependent selection and multiple-niche polymorphism under the Selection Balance heading, in order to help clarify these factors and make sure they are not grouped together as one concept.

I really liked your article and how you broke it into many sections, this made it a lot easier to read. I didn't find any grammar errors, but I think some sentences could be restructured, particularly in the genetics section and the last polymorphism section. Overall, great article! Mdanzo0807 (talk) 02:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Additional History
With only the mentioning of Willy Burgdorfer, additional background information on the discovery and importance of the studies conducted to arrive at the conclusion that Borrelia Borgdorferi is the causative agent of Lyme disease should be added. Erythema chronicum migrans cases in Europe and Lyme disease in the United States are both caused by spirochetes that are carried by vectors of the genus Ixodes (ticks). Before disproved by Hollstrom, ECM was determined to be caused by an allergic reaction to a toxin that ticks transmitted when they fed on humans or other mammals. Penicillin treatment ruled out the viral nature of the causative agent of disease. Spirochetes were determined to be the cause of disease by Lennhoff in 1948 after he biopsied the lesions of ECM patients. In the 60's, it was believed that ECM was a Rickettsial disease until slide agglutination, microscopy,Complement fixation test, microagglutination and microimmunofluorescence tests all came back negative for Rickettsial causation. After also ruling out hundreds of Arboviruses, along with many other viruses and agents by testing the serum of patients infected with Lyme disease, Burgdorfer studied Rocky Mountain spotted fever that is caused by R. rickettsii. The discovery of the spirochete responsible for Lyme disease in the midgut of Ixodes ticks was made using Giemsa stain and then reevaluated with Dark field microscopy. Dr. Carl Barbour aided Willy Burgdorfer in his validation of the causative agent of Lyme disease by culturing Borrelia burgdorferi and characterizing the organism with Immunochemistry. The two scientists also utilized indirect immunofluorescence and Western blotting to further validate the presence of spirochetes in infected individuals. 

Taxonomic changes 2013 onwards
Just noting that since 2013, Borrelia has been placed in the new family Borreliaceae and also that the Lyme-related Borrelia species have been separated in a new genus, Borreliella Adeolu & Gupta, 2015, a move which has been disputed by some (Margos et al., 2017) but reaffirmed by Barbour et al., 2017. References are:
 * Gupta, R. S.; Mahmood, S.; Adeolu, M. (2013). A phylogenomic and molecular signature based approach for characterization of the phylum Spirochaetes and its major clades: proposal for a taxonomic revision of the phylum. Frontiers in Microbiology. 4., available online at https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00217
 * Adeolu, M.; Gupta, R. S. (2014). A phylogenomic and molecular marker based proposal for the division of the genus Borrelia into two genera: the emended genus Borrelia containing only the members of the relapsing fever Borrelia, and the genus Borreliella gen. nov. containing the members of the Lyme disease Borrelia (Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex). Antonie van Leeuwenhoek. 105(6): 1049-1072., available online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-014-0164-x
 * Margos, G.; Marosevic, D.; Cutler, S.; Derdakova, M.; Diuk-Wasser, M.; Emler, S.; Fish, D.; Gray, J.; Hunfeldt, K.-P.; Jaulhac, B.; Kahl, O.; Kovalev, S.; Kraiczy, P.; Lane, R. S.; Lienhard, R.; Lindgren, P. E.; Ogden, N.; Ornstein, K.; Rupprecht, T.; Schwartz, I.; Sing, A.; Straubinger, R. K.; Strle, F.; Voordouw, M.; Rizzoli, A.; Stevenson, B.; Fingerle, V. (2017). There is inadequate evidence to support the division of the genus Borrelia. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 67(4): 1081-1084.
 * Barbour, A. G.; Adeolu, M.; Gupta, R. S. (2017). Division of the genus Borrelia into two genera (corresponding to Lyme disease and relapsing fever groups) reflects their genetic and phenotypic distinctiveness and will lead to a better understanding of these two groups of microbes (Margos et al. (2016) There is inadequate evidence to support the division of the genus Borrelia. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.001717). International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 67(6): 2058-2067.

Since the ramifications are somewhat wide ranging (and also subject to some dispute as noted above), (and I am also a bit busy with other things at present) I have not changed the current article text but may do in the future, or others are welcome to do so. Regards - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 20:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Genomics: accessory chromosomes
The article correctly states that the genome is unusual, in that it has quite many small chromosomes (or rather, accessory plasmids). Unfortunately the article does not mention more.

It would be interesting to: a) state how many smaller plasmids can be found in most burgdorferi, b) when this was discovered, and c) why this may be unusual compared to many other bacteria. 2A02:8388:1641:8380:3AD5:47FF:FE18:CC7F (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

False: Humans as dead end
Mothers pass the spirochetes to their children. Iknovate (talk) 15:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Someone with a little distance from the subject...
needs to read the lede for this article. From the perspective of accuracy, it may be fine (though I cannot imagine the lede actually summarises the article). But from the standpoint of intellectual accessibility, with its opening sensu stricto, its genospecies, its sensu lato, through to its closing mention of Gram negative (and no other description of anything that allows a non-microbiologist to understand anything at all about the organism, and how it functions, apart from the association with Lyme disease)—the lede at present breaks many WP guidelines about the function of the article lede, and about jargon vs clarity of writing (as I understand them). I appreciate that this is not the Simple English WP, but even here, this is not a good, lay-accessible introduction. Stating this as one well versed in such Latin phrases, scholarly apparatus, etc.; but you are not writing for me, here. 2601:246:C700:558:90DC:197A:2A99:87AA (talk) 14:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

New Information 4/21/2022
Added a summary table for Borrelia tests, added a transformation section under Microbiology heading, added more information to bacteriophage section concerning further research. Would appreciate further research into the sources I used, mainly looking for the tertiary looking out now for the tertiary sources where some were gathered. Feel free to edit any of the grammar or cross-check anything I added, but I believe it is 100% accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mic Goodwill (talk • contribs) 22:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)