Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T13:11:49.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bioactive components in the marsupial pouch and milk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2024

Manujaya W. Jayamanna Mohottige
Affiliation:
School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia
Chloe E. Gardner
Affiliation:
Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Mitchell G. Nye-Wood
Affiliation:
School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia
Katherine A. Farquharson
Affiliation:
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Angéla Juhász
Affiliation:
School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia
Katherine Belov
Affiliation:
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Carolyn J. Hogg
Affiliation:
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Emma Peel
Affiliation:
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Michelle L. Colgrave*
Affiliation:
School of Science, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA, Australia Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, Australia Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Agriculture and Food, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
*
Corresponding author: Michelle L. Colgrave; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Marsupials give birth to immunologically naïve young after a relatively short gestation period compared with eutherians. Consequently, the joey relies significantly on maternal protection, which is the focus of the present review. The milk and the pouch environment are essential contributors to maternal protection for the healthy development of joeys. In this review, we discuss bioactive components found in the marsupial pouch and milk that form cornerstones of maternal protection. These bioactive components include immune cells, immunoglobulins, the S100 family of calcium-binding proteins, lysozymes, whey proteins, antimicrobial peptides and other immune proteins. Furthermore, we investigated the possibility of the presence of plurifunctional components in milk and pouches that are potentially bioactive. These compounds include caseins, vitamins and minerals, oligosaccharides, lipids and microRNAs. Where applicable, this review addresses variability in bioactive components during different phases of lactation, designed to fulfil the immunological needs of the growing pouch young. Yet, there are numerous additional research opportunities to pursue, including uncovering novel bioactive components and investigating their modes of action, dynamics, stability and ability to penetrate the gut epithelium to facilitate systemic effects.

Type
Review Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that no alterations are made and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use and/or adaptation of the article.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

Introduction

Milk is a complete food source for mammalian young. It is particularly important for marsupials, given their unique reproductive and developmental biology. Marsupials have a very short gestation period of up to 30 d, after which they give birth to altricial young that undergo the majority of development ex utero within the pouch(Reference Tyndale-Biscoe1). The development of pouch young is supported by a complex and extended lactation period, with examples such as koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus)(Reference Martin and Handasyde2) which can lactate for up to 12 months. Conversely, eutherian mammals, such as humans, have an extended in utero development and comparatively consistent milk composition throughout lactation(Reference Kuruppath, Bisana and Sharp3).

Lactation in marsupials studied to date is divided into three phases that differ in nutrients (protein, carbohydrate and fat) and bioactive compounds. For a thorough review of the nutritional components of marsupial milk, see Refs.(Reference Stannard, Miller and Old4,Reference Sharp, Lefèvre and Nicholas5) . The timing and definition of these phases differ between species. In this review, we will use the phases defined for tammar wallaby (Notamacropus eugenii) and brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) as their milk is the most well-studied amongst marsupials. Phase 1 represents pregnancy, phase 2A (early lactation) is when the joey is permanently attached to the teat, phase 2B (mid-lactation) is when the joey suckles intermittently, and phase 3 (late lactation) is when the joey starts to exit the pouch and is eventually weaned at approximately 9 months(Reference Demmer, Ross and Ginger6,Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds7) .

Marsupial young are immunologically naïve at birth and lack mature immune tissues and cells for up to 120 d postpartum(Reference Old and Deane8). Given that the pouch is not sterile and contains a diverse range of microorganisms(Reference Maidment, Bryan and Pyne9,Reference Weiss, Taggart and Smith10) , the young require immunological support during development. Multiple mechanisms ensure the protection of joeys during this time, including passive immunity via the milk and bioactive compounds in the pouch skin. Numerous immune cells and proteins, such as immunoglobulins, have been identified in marsupial milk, which change in composition and abundance during lactation(Reference Cheng and Belov11,Reference Edwards, Hinds and Deane12) . Bioactive peptides within the milk and pouch, such as antimicrobial peptides (cathelicidins and defensins), lysozyme and marsupial-specific growth factors, also provide immune and nutritional support(Reference Cheng and Belov11,Reference Edwards, Hinds and Deane12) .

Marsupial joeys can be orphaned due to threats such as habitat loss and fragmentation, vehicle strike and fire(Reference Doherty, Geary and Miritis13). Orphan joeys in care are hand-raised using commercial colostrum and milk substitutes such as Wombaroo (Woombaroo Food Products, SA, Australia), Di-Vetelact (Lillelund Pty Ltd, NSW, Australia) and Marsupial Milk Replacer (Exotic Nutrition, Virginia, United States), which are tailored milk substitutes for kangaroos, wombats, possums and koalas of varying ages. A colostrum substitute is also commercially available (Woombaroo Food Products, SA, Australia) that contains bovine colostrum powder. Although these milk formulae meet the nutritional requirements (carbohydrate, protein, lipid) of joeys during development, they do not contain the diversity of bioactive immune compounds within marsupial milk. Given the essential role of milk immune proteins in marsupial development, it is not surprising that many orphaned joeys fail to thrive in care. For example, at one wildlife hospital (QLD, Australia), 31% of orphaned marsupials and 35·5% of orphaned koalas do not survive, compared with 25·7% mortality across all admitted orphaned wildlife species(Reference Taylor-Brown, Booth and Gillett14). Given the long evolutionary divergence between marsupials and eutherians(Reference Luo, Yuan and Meng15), there is a need for marsupial-specific knowledge of their milk’s bioactive components. In addition, the important role of the pouch in marsupial development compels investigation of possible bioactivity in pouch secretions.

Bioactive compounds in the milk, mammary gland and pouch of marsupials have been investigated in multiple species. These include the koala, tammar wallaby, Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii), brushtail possum, ringtail possum (Pseudocheirus peregrinus), woylie (Bettongia penicillata), quokka (Setonix brachyurus) and red kangaroo (Macropus rufus). A range of methods have been used to investigate bioactive compounds, including mammary gland and pouch skin transcriptomes(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic16Reference Lefèvre, Digby and Whitley19); proteomes from milk(Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds7,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Raftery21) ; pouch secretion proteomes; and antimicrobial testing of pouch washes(Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Raftery21Reference Baudinette, Boontheung and Musgrave23).

Marsupial milk contains many bioactive compounds, including bioactive proteins, antimicrobial peptides (AMP)(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) , marsupial-specific growth factors(Reference Sharp, Wanyonyi and Modepalli24) and lipids(Reference Crowleyac, Woodward and Rose25), oligosaccharides(Reference Durham, Wei and Lemay26) and microRNAs(Reference Sharp, Lefèvre and Nicholas5). Here, we expand upon recent milk reviews(Reference Stannard, Miller and Old4,Reference Cheng and Belov11,Reference Pharo27) by summarising research specific to components of the marsupial milk and pouch with demonstrable bioactive roles. We also highlight compounds with suspected bioactive roles based on evidence in other species as areas for future investigation in marsupials. A thorough understanding of bioactive components in marsupial milk will allow advances in the development of antimicrobials and the targeted development of marsupial-specific milk substitutes.

Bioactive compounds

Immune cells

Marsupial milk contains numerous immune cell types that provide passive immunity to the developing pouch young(Reference Smith and Keyte28) (Table 1). Macrophages, neutrophils and lymphocytes have been identified in the colostrum and throughout lactation in the tammar wallaby, quokka and koala(Reference Young, Basden and Cooper29Reference Cockson and McNeice31). Neutrophils are the most abundant immune cells in koala milk, and their numbers increase until the end of lactation, highlighting their importance to phagocytic protection of the joey even at this late stage(Reference Young, Basden and Cooper29,Reference Young and Deane30) . Preference for a high level of neutrophils may be due to their superior capacity to deal with pathogenic bacteria and fungi(Reference Young, Basden and Cooper29). A range of other immune cells are likely to be present in milk, given the identification of immune receptors and cell markers in milk transcriptomes and proteomes(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) . These include dendritic cells, helper (CD4) and cytotoxic (CD8) T lymphocytes, and other granulocytes such as eosinophils and basophils(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) .

Table 1. Bioactive components present in mammary gland, milk and pouch environment

IgA, immunoglobulin A; IgE, immunoglobulin E; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IgM, immunoglobulin M; MM1, marsupial milk 1; VELP, very early lactation protein; WAP, whey acidic protein; WFDC2, WAP four-disulphide domain protein-2.

Immunoglobulins

Immunoglobulins (Igs) play an important role in adaptive immunity. There are four types of Igs in marsupials (IgA, IgE, IgM and IgG) that have different functions(Reference Morris, Prentis and O’Meally32) (Table 1). IgA is involved in mucosal immunity, IgE is involved in defence against parasites and hypersensitivity, IgG is the most abundant immunoglobulin in the extracellular fluid and blood, and IgM is the first immunoglobulin produced after exposure to an antigen(Reference Morris, Prentis and O’Meally32). All four Ig types are present in marsupial milk and mammary glands. Once transferred through the milk, they can provide passive immunity to the altricial young(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Hurley and Theil33) . IgA and IgG are the predominant Igs in marsupial milk, which is also the case in eutherians(Reference Deane and Cooper34Reference Adamski and Demmer36).

Immunoglobulins are generally transferred via the milk during two periods in marsupials: in the colostrum immediately after birth at the start of phase 2A, and when the young first emerges from the pouch at the onset of phase 3(Reference Adamski and Demmer36,Reference Daly, Digby and Lefèvre37) . At these times, high levels of Igs provide passive protection as young are exposed to new environments and microorganisms(Reference Cheng and Belov11). However, the expression of Ig types at these two timepoints can differ between species. IgG is absorbed across the pouch young gut epithelium, facilitated by the neonatal Fc receptor, and enters peripheral circulation, thereby protecting against infection(Reference Yadav38). IgG was detected in wallaby, kangaroo and possum colostrum, although the concentration was low compared with eutherian colostrum(Reference Deane and Cooper34,Reference Deane, Cooper and Renfreec35) . In possums, IgG was significantly elevated during late lactation compared with early lactation(Reference Adamski and Demmer36), whereas in koalas, IgG levels remained constant through early and late lactation, although the neonatal Fc receptor was expressed only during early lactation(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Adamski and Demmer36,Reference Daly, Digby and Lefévre39) .

IgA and IgM are not absorbed across the gut epithelium but are involved in immune defence at these sites(Reference Woof and Kerr40). IgA was identified in the colostrum of the tammar wallaby and brushtail possum(Reference Deane, Cooper and Renfreec35,Reference Adamski and Demmer41) . Higher IgA levels were observed during late lactation compared with early lactation in the koala and brushtail possum(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Adamski and Demmer41) . In the koala milk proteome, IgA accounted for 2% of peptides in late lactation, compared with only 0·08% in early lactation. Conversely, IgM was identified only during early lactation in the koala and was not found in a late lactation milk proteome(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). Tasmanian devil milk has been investigated only during mid-lactation, and IgA levels were the highest of the four Ig types present(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18).

The S100 family of calcium-binding proteins

The S100 protein family consists of S100A1–S100A16, S100A19, S100B, S100G, S100P and S100Z proteins(Reference Kwek, Wynne and Lefèvre42). These proteins have well-known antimicrobial and immunomodulatory functions in eutherians(Reference Ryckman, Vandal and Rouleau43,Reference Büchau, Hassan and Kukova44) . In humans, S100A8 and S100A9 are highly expressed in colostrum and at lower levels in mature milk(Reference Pirr, Richter and Fehlhaber45). Gene knockout experiments in mice have shown that S100A8 and S100A9 are absorbed across the neonatal gut, enter peripheral circulation and may protect against neonatal sepsis via direct antimicrobial activity(Reference Pirr, Richter and Fehlhaber45,Reference Wang, Song and Wang46) . In marsupials, S100A8 and S100A9 are expressed in the milk and mammary gland(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic17), whereas S100A9 and S100A15 are expressed in the pouch skin(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Kwek, Wynne and Lefèvre42) (Table 1). Interestingly, S100A8 and S100A9 were not present in the koala early lactation milk transcriptome or proteome and have not been investigated in the colostrum of any marsupial species. Instead, these proteins were highly abundant in mid- and late lactation in devils and koalas(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) . S100A9 was the seventh most highly expressed immune transcript in the Tasmanian devil mid-lactation milk transcriptome (0·07%)(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18). Similarly, S100A8 and S100A9 were highly abundant in the koala late lactation milk proteome, being the eighth (1·67%) and twenty-fifth (0·59%) most abundant protein, respectively(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18). The high abundance of S100A8 and S100A9 indicates that these proteins may have important functions in marsupial milk, likely having anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties similar to human S100A8 and S100A9. The marsupial S100A8–S100A9 complex may also enter peripheral circulation in the young and protect against systemic infection, as in humans(Reference Pirr, Richter and Fehlhaber45).

Marsupials also have a unique S100 protein not found in eutherians, S100A19. This protein is expressed in the tammar wallaby mammary gland during pregnancy and involution but not lactation(Reference Kwek, Wynne and Lefèvre42). S100A19 is also expressed in the foregut of joeys during early pouch life when their diet consists only of milk(Reference Kwek, Wynne and Lefèvre42). Marsupial S100A19 is closely related to eutherian S100A15 and A7(Reference Kwek, Wynne and Lefèvre42), both of which are antimicrobial(Reference Büchau, Hassan and Kukova44,Reference Gläser, Harder and Lange47) . As such, S100A19 likely provides antimicrobial protection to the mammary gland and pouch young gut during development.

Lysozymes

The lysozyme family comprises lysozyme C and calcium-binding lysozyme. Among these, lysozyme C is the most prevalent across mammals, while calcium-binding lysozyme is less common(Reference Ragland and Criss48,Reference Irwin, Biegel and Stewart49) . Lysozyme is widely expressed in milk and is renowned for its antibacterial activity and immunomodulatory roles within the innate immune system(Reference Ragland and Criss48). Variation exists between mammalian species in the number of lysozyme C genes, with one gene identified in humans, four in the grey short-tailed opossum (Monodelphis domestica) and two complete and six incomplete genes in the tammar wallaby(Reference Irwin, Biegel and Stewart49). Gene duplications in the lysozyme family have not been well characterised across marsupials despite the recent release of numerous high-quality reference genomes across the marsupial tree(Reference Peel, Silver and Brandies50Reference Stammnitz, Gori and Kwon52). In marsupial milk, lysozyme has been identified in the early milk proteome of the tammar wallaby(Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds53), mid-lactation milk transcriptome of the Tasmanian devil(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18), mid-lactation milk of the ringtail possum(Reference Nicholas, Loughnan and Messer54) and late lactation milk proteome of the koala(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20), and in the whey proteins and mammary gland RNA of all lactation stages of the brushtail possum(Reference Piotte, Marshall and Hubbard55) (Table 1). Up-regulation of lysozyme gene expression in the mammary gland and greater lysozyme C abundance in the milk as the lactation cycle progresses(Reference Demmer, Ross and Ginger6,Reference Vander Jagt, Whitley and Cocks56,Reference Kuy, Kelly and Smit57) suggests an important role of lysozyme C as the joey detaches from the teat and starts to move out of the pouch. Lysozyme has also been identified by proteomics in post-reproductive tammar wallaby pouch secretions(Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Deane58), and lysozyme C was the most highly abundant transcript in the woylie pouch skin(Reference Peel, Silver and Brandies50). Although lysozyme has well-characterised antibacterial activity in eutherians(Reference Irwin, Biegel and Stewart49), possible antimicrobial and immunomodulatory roles of lysozyme in marsupials remain to be confirmed.

Transferrin and lactoferrin

The glycoproteins transferrin and lactoferrin are both integral components of the transferrin family and major components of milk. Lactoferrin exists in three isoforms: lactoferrin-α, lactoferrin-β and lactoferrin-γ. Lactoferrin-α is the only isoform capable of binding iron. The iron-binding and sequestration capabilities of transferrin and lactoferrin-α are crucial in inhibiting bacterial growth(Reference Kell, Heyden and Pretorius59). Lactoferrin has demonstrated antibacterial, antiviral, antifungal, anti-inflammatory and anticarcinogenic activity(Reference Kell, Heyden and Pretorius59) (Table 1). Furthermore, enzymatic cleavage of the N-lobe of lactoferrin yields crucial peptides lactoferricin and lactoferrampin, which exhibit antimicrobial activity and are under positive selection in primates(Reference Barber, Kronenberg and Yandell60). Marsupial N lobe sequences from the opossum and Tasmanian devil cluster separately to eutherians(Reference Hughes and Friedman61), but neither antimicrobial function nor diversity within marsupials has been explored.

Lactoferrin was the most abundant protein in the koala late lactation milk proteome (Fig. 1), accounting for almost half of all transcripts expressed(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). Possible antimicrobial or other functions should be investigated to better understand the role of lactoferrin in marsupials.

Figure 1. Differential expression of lactoferrin between early and late proteomes. Lactoferricin accounted for 49·4% of all transcripts expressed in koala milk during late lactation, but just 0·19% of transcripts produced during early lactation.

Transferrin has been detected around the time of birth in the brushtail possum(Reference Adamski and Demmer36) and tammar wallaby(Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Raftery21) (Table 1). Elevated levels of transferrin have also been observed at mid-lactation, when the joey begins exiting the pouch, in both the ringtail(Reference Nicholas, Loughnan and Messer54) and brushtail possums(Reference Adamski and Demmer36,Reference Adamski and Demmer41,Reference Grigor, Bennett and Carne62) . Transferrin was also identified in the early lactation milk proteome(Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds53) and mid-lactation mammary gland transcriptome(Reference Lefèvre, Digby and Whitley19) of the tammar wallaby. Evidence for increased expression of transferrin coinciding with birth and first pouch exit suggests that it may play an important role in the immunological protection of marsupial young.

Whey proteins

The whey acidic protein (WAP) is a type of whey protein characterised by cysteine-rich domains, known as disulfide core (4-DSC) domains(Reference Wilkinson, Roghanian and Simpson63). The WAP is classified as antimicrobial and involved in inhibiting neutrophil serine proteases(Reference Wiesner and Vilcinskas64). WAP inhibits the growth of Staphylococcus aureus (Reference Iwamori, Nukumi and Itoh65) and also has non-immune functions, such as stimulating the proliferation of mammary epithelial cells(Reference Topcic, Auguste and De Leo66). WAP has been identified as a major whey protein in the milk of numerous eutherian and marsupial species, as well as monotremes(Reference Sharp, Lefèvre and Nicholas67) (Table 1). Marsupial WAP has an additional 4-DSC domain to the two 4-DSCs in eutherian WAP(Reference Sharp, Lefèvre and Nicholas67). WAP was one of the top 200 most highly expressed transcripts in the Tasmanian devil mid-lactation milk transcriptome(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18) and has also been detected at mid-lactation in the red kangaroo(Reference Nicholas, Fisher and Muths68) and brushtail possum(Reference Demmer, Stasiuk and Adamski69). The tammar wallaby mammary gland WAP four-disulphide domain protein-2 (WFDC2) has demonstrated bactericidal activity against Salmonella enterica, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and S. aureus but no activity against commensal bacteria(Reference Watt, Sharp and Lefevre70). In koalas, WFDC2 was abundant in the early lactation milk proteome and present in the late lactation proteome(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). The abundance of WFDC2 in early lactation may coincide with the need for increased immune protection around birth, while the expression of WAP in mid-lactation suggests a possible immunological role in protecting the joey as it begins to exit the pouch.

Whey proteins with specific primary roles can also have secondary bioactive functions as pre-proteins, aside from contributing to the macronutrient profile of milk. Prominent preproteins in marsupial milk include β-lactoglobulin, which is a lipocalin protein that transports iron and other hydrophobic molecules(Reference Roth-Walter, Pacios and Gomez-Casado71), and α-lactalbumin, which is intimately involved in lactose metabolism(Reference Brew72) and iron absorption(Reference Wang and Zhang73). Evidence from eutherians suggests possible bioactivity of these two whey proteins. Proteolytic digestion of bovine β-lactoglobulin and α-lactalbumin resulted in numerous sequences with activity against Gram-positive bacteria(Reference Pellegrini, Thomas and Bramaz74,Reference Pellegrini, Dettling and Thomas75) (Table 1). β-Lactoglobulin and α-lactalbumin have been widely identified in marsupial milk: both were among the top 200 most highly expressed transcripts in the Tasmanian devil milk transcriptome(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18) and were the predominant proteins in the mature reproductively active tammar wallaby pouch(Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Deane58). α-Lactalbumin was expressed in the mammary gland of the brushtail possum at all phases of lactation and increased in phase 3(Reference Demmer, Ross and Ginger6,Reference Piotte, Marshall and Hubbard55) and was present in all samples of ringtail possum milk tested(Reference Nicholas, Loughnan and Messer54). β-Lactoglobulin was the most abundant transcript in the koala mammary gland transcriptome(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20); was secreted at constant levels in red kangaroo mid-lactation(Reference Nicholas, Fisher and Muths68); was present in the early milk protein and expressed in the mammary gland at constant levels throughout lactation in the brushtail possum(Reference Demmer, Ross and Ginger6,Reference Kuy, Kelly and Smit57) ; and was present in the tammar wallaby mid- and late lactation mammary gland transcriptomes(Reference Lefèvre, Digby and Whitley19). The main chain of β-lactoglobulin was also identified in the milk proteins of the tammar wallaby throughout lactation, with a second isoform present in phase 2A and a third isoform at a high concentration in phase 2B(Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds7). In pouch secretions of the tammar wallaby, β-lactoglobulin was present in high concentrations. Although there was no evidence of direct antimicrobial activity of β-lactoglobulin against Escherichia coli or S. aureus, the antimicrobial potential of cleaved peptides has been hypothesised(Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Raftery21). Both α-lactalbumin and β-lactoglobulin are present in the milk, mammary glands and pouches of numerous marsupials. It is possible they provide immune protection when cleaved, but given that they have other functions, their expression likely has other effects, too, and further investigation is required to confirm their bioactivity.

Additional immune proteins

Marsupial milk is also a rich source of other immune proteins, accounting for 9% and 6·6% of all proteins in koala and Tasmanian devil milk, respectively(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) (Table 1). These include immune receptors such as the major histocompatibility complex proteins (MHC) classes I and II, toll-like receptors (TLRs) and natural killer (NK) cell receptors(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Lefèvre, Digby and Whitley76) . The presence of these receptors indicates the diversity of immune cells present in the milk and mammary gland, and potential protective functions involving antigen recognition and binding.

Immune signalling molecules, such as cytokines and chemokines, are also present in marsupial milk and mammary glands. The chemokine CCL25 was one of the most highly expressed immune signalling molecules in both koala and Tasmanian devil milk(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) . CCL25 has only recently been identified in human milk and is highly expressed in colostrum(Reference Abe, Onoda and Furushima77). In humans, CCL25 is essential for thymocyte development(Reference Uehara, Hayes and Li78) and may play a similar role in pouch young. Other chemokines, such as CCL28, were also identified in the devil mammary gland transcriptome(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). In humans, CCL28 and CCL25 facilitate the transfer of IgA into the milk by attracting IgA-antibody-producing immune cells to the mammary gland epithelium(Reference Wilson and Butcher79,Reference Bowman, Kuklin and Youngman80) . CCL28 is also antibacterial against Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, and the fungus Candida albicans (Reference Hieshima, Ohtani and Shibano81). As such, these chemokines may be involved in both direct and indirect protection of the pouch young gastrointestinal tract.

Complement factors are present in both marsupial milk and the mammary gland. Proteins involved in the classical complement pathway (C2, C3 and C4A) were identified in the koala milk proteome and mammary gland transcriptome(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). These factors were highly abundant during early lactation, accounting for 2·4% of peptides. Complement proteins bind to pathogens, thereby enabling phagocytosis by immune cells, and some are also bactericidal(Reference Janeway, Travers and Walport82).

Antimicrobial peptides

Cathelicidins and defensins

Cathelicidins and defensins are two major families of antimicrobial peptides in mammals. They form part of the innate immune system through antimicrobial and immunomodulatory activity and may also be involved in immune defence against cancer(Reference Kościuczuk, Lisowski and Jarczak83Reference Petrohilos, Patchett and Hogg85). Cathelicidins and defensins are small, cationic, amphipathic peptides that are expressed in immune and epithelial cells(Reference Kościuczuk, Lisowski and Jarczak83,Reference Bals and Wilson86) . Both cathelicidins and defensins are encoded as pre-propeptides that undergo enzymatic cleavage to release the C-terminal active mature peptide(Reference Kościuczuk, Lisowski and Jarczak83,Reference Ganz87) . Defensin mature peptides contain six highly conserved cysteine residues that form three disulphide bonds that define the α-, β- and θ-subfamilies(Reference Yang, Biragyn and Hoover84,Reference Hazlett and Wu88) . Theta defensins are found only in Old World primates and so are not discussed further in this review. Both cathelicidins and defensins from eutherian mammals have antimicrobial activity against fungi, enveloped viruses, Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and parasites(Reference Yang, Biragyn and Hoover84,Reference van-Harten, van-Woudenbergh and van-Dijk89) . They are also immunomodulatory; they enhance phagocytosis, are chemotactic, induce degranulation of neutrophils and mast cells, and induce migration of epithelial cells(Reference Yang, Biragyn and Hoover84,Reference van-Harten, van-Woudenbergh and van-Dijk89) .

Marsupials have a large repertoire of diverse cathelicidins, likely driven by the need for additional immune protection of altricial young during development in the pouch (Table 1). This differs from eutherians, such as humans and mice, that have only a single cathelicidin peptide(Reference van-Harten, van-Woudenbergh and van-Dijk89). Cathelicidins have only been characterised in the grey short-tailed opossum, koala, Tasmanian devil and tammar wallaby, with between six and nineteen cathelicidin genes identified in a single species(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic16,Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic17,Reference Daly, Digby and Lefévre39,Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic90,Reference Belov, Sanderson and Deakin91) . Similar to human cathelicidins, marsupial peptides have broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity against Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus, and fungi (Fig. 2)(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic16,Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic17,Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic90) . Koala cathelicidin PhciCath5 was active against Chlamydia pecorum, one of the aetiological agents that cause chlamydiosis that has severely impacted koala populations(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic17). Recent work has shown that Tasmanian devil cathelicidins have anticancer activity against devil facial tumour disease (DFTD) cells and may also have immunomodulatory functions (Fig. 2)(Reference Petrohilos, Patchett and Hogg85).

Figure 2. Bioactive roles of cathelicidin.

Marsupial cathelicidins are expressed in the milk and mammary gland throughout lactation(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic16,Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Carman, Simonian and Old92) . This is unlike other immune proteins that are generally expressed in only two periods as discussed in previous sections(Reference Edwards, Hinds and Deane12). In the tammar wallaby and koala, individual cathelicidins were differentially expressed during early and late lactation(Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds7,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Wanyonyi, Sharp and Khalil93) . Some of these peptides had antimicrobial activity, whereas others were not active against the strains tested and may have immunomodulatory functions(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic17,Reference Wanyonyi, Sharp and Khalil93) . In addition, cathelicidins may also be involved in mammary gland proliferation and remodelling during involution in the tammar wallaby (Fig. 2)(Reference Wanyonyi, Sharp and Khalil93). Cathelicidins are also expressed in the pouch skin(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic16,Reference Peel, Silver and Brandies50) and may provide direct protection. Tasmanian devil cathelicidins expressed in the pouch were active against bacteria identified in the pouch microbiome. Cathelicidins may also indirectly protect pouch young by contributing to modulation of bacterial communities in the pouch, although this hypothesis has not been proven(Reference Peel, Cheng and Djordjevic16).

Defensins are the second major family of antimicrobial peptides in mammals. Defensins have been characterised in the greater bilby (Macrotis lagotis), brown antechinus (Antechinus stuartii), common wombat (Vombatus ursinus), fat-tailed dunnart (Sminthopsis crassicaudata), eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii), red kangaroo, western ringtail possum, numbat (Myrmecobius fasciatus), woylie, grey short-tailed opossum, koala, tammar wallaby and Tasmanian devil(Reference Belov, Sanderson and Deakin91,Reference Jones, Yuanyuan and O’Meally94,Reference Peel, Hogg and Belov95) (Table 1). Marsupials encode multiple α- and β-defensin genes within their genomes, similar to eutherians. However, some α- and β-defensin lineages are specific to marsupials and, hence, may have novel functions(Reference Jones, Yuanyuan and O’Meally94). α-Defensins have not been detected in any marsupial milk, mammary gland or pouch skin transcriptome or proteome to date, so their bioactive role at these sites is unknown(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Jones, Yuanyuan and O’Meally94) . A small number of β-defensins were expressed during early lactation in the koala(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Jones, Yuanyuan and O’Meally94) and mid-lactation in the Tasmanian devil(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18). β-Defensins were also found in the transcriptomes of the koala’s lactating mammary gland, the bilby’s non-lactating mammary gland and the pouch skin of both bilby and the woylie(Reference Peel, Hogg and Belov95). Human defensins are expressed in the mammary gland and provide antibacterial defence against infections such as mastitis as well as neonatal gastrointestinal infections(Reference Baricelli, Rocafull and Vázquez96,Reference Tunzi, Harper and Bar-Oz97) . Given the function of marsupial defensins is unknown, future studies should focus on understanding the antimicrobial and immunomodulatory functions of these peptides, and their potential role in protecting marsupial pouch young.

Other antimicrobial peptides

Numerous antimicrobial peptides have been identified in marsupial milk, pouch and mammary gland, many due to availability of genomic and proteomic datasets and the comprehensive and in-depth nature of bioinformatic analysis (Table 1). Some are unique to marsupials, such as marsupial milk 1 (MM1), whereas others are orthologs of eutherian proteins, such as very early lactation protein (VELP)(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20).

VELP has been identified in the milk and mammary glands of the brushtail possum, tammar wallaby, koala and Tasmanian devil(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds53,Reference Kuy, Kelly and Smit57) . VELP was initially thought to be unique to marsupials but has since been identified as an ortholog of the eutherian protein glycam 1(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18). Glycam 1 is present in only some eutherians and is a pseudogene in humans(Reference Rasmussen, Johnsen and Petersen98). VELP abundance changes throughout lactation and differs between species. In the tammar wallaby, VELP is expressed in the mammary gland from pregnancy through to mid-lactation, but not in late lactation(Reference Joss, Molloy and Hinds7). VELP is also expressed at low levels during mid-lactation in the Tasmanian devil, being the only lactation phase investigated in this species(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18). In koalas, VELP is highly abundant in early lactation, accounting for 13·3% of all peptides, which continues throughout late lactation(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). The closely related eutherian protein glycam1 is also expressed in milk(Reference Groenen, Dijkhof and ban-der-Poel99), where it has antibacterial and antiviral functions(Reference Campagna, Mathot and Fleury100,Reference Inagaki, Nagai and Yabe101) . The function of VELP has not been tested, but it likely provides antimicrobial protection to the pouch young given the close evolutionary relationship to glycam 1.

Marsupial milk 1 (MM1) (previously called novel gene 1) is a putative antimicrobial peptide unique to marsupials. MM1 has been identified only in mammary gland transcriptomes and milk proteomes of the koala, devil and tammar wallaby and is specifically expressed in these tissues(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) . MM1 was highly expressed in the koala and devil, being the twenty-seventh most highly abundant transcript in the devil mammary gland, and twenty-sixth most highly abundant peptide in the koala early lactation proteome(Reference Hewavisenti, Morris and O’Meally18,Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20) . The function of MM1 is unknown but is likely antimicrobial given genomic evidence. In the koala genome, MM1 is encoded in a genomic region that is syntenic to the region encoding antimicrobial proteins such as glycam 1 and dermcidin in humans(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20). The abundance and tissue specificity of MM1 suggests that this peptide may play an important role in the antimicrobial protection of the mammary gland and pouch young.

Dermcidin is an AMP secreted from sweat glands in the skin and is the major antimicrobial compound in human sweat(Reference Schittek, Hipfel and Sauer102). Dermcidin has broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity against bacteria and fungi across a range of pH and salt concentrations, which attenuate the activity of many other AMPs(Reference Schittek103). The pouch is essentially a fold of skin that undergoes significant structural changes leading up to birth and during lactation(Reference Tyndale-Biscoe1). As such, it is not surprising that dermcidin is present in the pouch secretions of tammar wallabies and wombats(Reference Ambatipudi, Joss and Deane58). Pouch wash protein fractions, which included dermcidin, displayed antibacterial activity(Reference Schittek, Hipfel and Sauer102). Dermcidin was not identified in woylie pouch skin, although this sample was from a female without pouch young(Reference Peel, Silver and Brandies50). As such, dermcidin in marsupials may be involved in regulating the pouch microbiome and preventing infections, similar to human dermcidin(Reference Schittek103).

The diversity and complexity of antimicrobial peptides (AMP) discovered thus far highlight their pivotal role in aiding immune protection to the developing pouch young. The array of capabilities AMP possess shows their relevance in governing immune protection and represents marsupials’ adaptive evolutionary methods to maintain the survival and health of their young.

Plurifunctional components with bioactive potential

Beyond their essential nutritive functions, milk components such as caseins and their derived peptides, as well as oligosaccharides, lipids, vitamins, minerals and microRNAs, demonstrate additional bioactivities in mammals (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Other potentially bioactive maternal compounds.

Casein

Compared with bovine milk, where protein is approximately 80% casein and 20% whey proteins(Reference Jäkälä and Vapaatalo104), marsupial milk has relatively less casein with a ratio of approximately 50:50. This is generally constant throughout lactation, although concentration tends to increase(Reference Nicholas105). The most abundant caseins are β-casein, followed by α-casein, then κ-casein(Reference Morris, O’Meally and Zaw20,Reference Vercruysse, Van Camp and Dewettinck106) . κ-Casein was once thought to be absent in marsupials until the genes encoding κ-casein were discovered in the brushtail possum(Reference Stasiuk, Summers and Demmer107). The amount of casein increases throughout lactation, predominantly owing to β-casein while α-casein remains relatively stable. In wallabies, caseins form micelles similar in structure to the well-studied bovine milk, despite the notable evolutionary distance(Reference Horne, Anema and Zhu108). Although caseins and whey proteins are well-known sources of nourishment, the peptides generated from these proteins can also play key roles in supporting an array of biological processes. Bioactive peptides generated from eutherian milk caseins have demonstrated an array of immunomodulatory and antimicrobial functionalities. Casocidin-1 generated from αs2-casein in cow has potent in vitro antimicrobial activity against E. coli and Staphylococcus carnosus. Isracidin is another casein (αs1-casein)-derived peptide that has displayed antibacterial activity in vivo against S. aureus and Candida albicans in cow and sheep(Reference Silva and Malcata109). Apart from these direct antimicrobial roles, β- and κ-casein-derived peptides in cow milk may promote lymphocyte proliferation, whereas β-casein identified from human milk induces chemokine production(Reference Nielsen, Liang and Rathish110). Peptides derived from casein have been found in peripheral circulation in neonates but not in adults, indicating that they can cross the gastrointestinal barrier and enter systemic circulation in infants. This finding highlights the possible age-specific functions that these peptides may have in promoting juvenile health and development(Reference Fox, Uniacke-Lowe and McSweeney111). However, a focus on milk peptides derived from caseins in marsupials has been notably insufficient or absent. Given that they likely represent a large proportion of the milk proteome in marsupials, a deeper understanding of casein-derived peptides will be essential for the development of tailored marsupial immune milk supplements to ensure orphaned joeys’ survival.

Vitamins and minerals

Milk provides essential dietary vitamins and minerals that are required for a variety of bioactive functions, including bone mineralisation, enzyme cofactors and hormonal/nutritive signalling. Marsupial milk mineral content has been reviewed recently(Reference Stannard, Miller and Old4), although the marsupial-specific literature on milk vitamins is limited and varies across species.

Kangaroo milk contains a similar diversity and concentration of vitamins to cow milk(Reference Poole, Sharman and Scott112), including lipophilic (vitamin A) and hydrophilic (B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7 and B12) vitamins(Reference Gaucheron113). Similar to other milk nutrients, the concentration of vitamins differs between lactation phases 2 and 3(Reference Poole, Sharman and Scott112). Folic acid (vitamin B9) is the most stable form of folate, which is an essential bioactive vitamin for neural tube closure and guides spinal cord development in mammals. In eutherians, this occurs early in gestation as folic acid is delivered via maternal blood. Suboptimal uptake of folic acid during pregnancy in eutherians leads to perinatal morbidity and mortality, signifying its importance(Reference Denny, Jeanes and Fathe114). In marsupials, neural development occurs ex utero within the pouch; hence, folic acid is delivered via the milk. This finding could explain why red and grey kangaroos’ (Macropus giganteus) early lactation milk contains elevated levels of folic acid, which then decreases throughout the lactation period(Reference Poole, Sharman and Scott112). The fluctuation of these vitamins based on their lactation stages has been descriptively studied in Poole’s 1982 study(Reference Poole, Sharman and Scott112).

Oligosaccharides

The carbohydrate fraction of milk contains oligosaccharides, which are present in higher proportions than lactose in marsupials compared with eutherians(Reference Urashima, Horiuchi and Sakanaka115). Human milk oligosaccharides have demonstrated prebiotic, anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory activity(Reference Durham, Wei and Lemay26). Milk oligosaccharides in humans have proven to be incredibly resistant to hydrolysis by digestive enzymes in the small intestine and are known to pass through it unaltered. When they reach the colon, the endogenous microflora is known to secrete enzymes that allow them to utilise oligosaccharides as a source of energy, which leads to competitive inhibition of pathogenic microbial proliferation as illustrated in Fig. 4, thereby performing the prebiotic role(Reference Engfer, Stahl and Finke116). The beneficial microflora’s metabolic activity further lowers gut pH, which hinders pathogen proliferation(Reference Urashima, Fukuda and Messer117). They also function as receptor analogues that inhibit the attachment of pathogens to epithelial cells by facilitating their binding to oligosaccharides in the gut lumen. Pathogens may mistake free oligosaccharides for those bound to cell membranes and bind to them rather than attaching to joey tissue (Fig. 4)(Reference Newburg118). A database of oligosaccharides across mammals, MilkOligoDB, revealed predominantly linear oligosaccharide structures in the koala, wombat and brushtail possum(Reference Durham, Wei and Lemay26). Despite the variety of digestive systems and distinct microflora observed among marsupials due to their diverse dietary preferences(Reference Hume119), there remains a strong likelihood that oligosaccharides found in marsupial species will exhibit similar behaviour to human milk oligosaccharides in this context.

Figure 4. (1) Oligosaccharides (A) promote the proliferation of beneficial bacteria (B) while serving as receptor analogues and binding to invading pathogens (C), blocking their attachment to the gut epithelium. (2) Proliferation of beneficial microflora results in lower pH levels, which leads to competitive inhibition of potentially pathogenic microflora (1. D).

Lipids

Although milk fat has a reputation as a primary source of energy, it also has the potential to be bioactive. Bioactive lipids in mammalian milk comprise triacylglycerols, diacylglycerols, saturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids, and phospholipids, which have been shown to have anticancer, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive traits(Reference German and Dillard120).

Lipid content in marsupial milk gradually increases during early lactation, before rising substantially in late lactation to a peak during weaning(Reference Crowleyac, Woodward and Rose25,Reference Green, Merchant and Newgrain121Reference Muths123) . Lipid content during late lactation can be five-fold higher than early lactation, which indicates a switch from carbohydrates to lipids as the major energy source(Reference Rose, Shetewi and Flowers124). However, in arboreal folivorous marsupials, such as koalas, brushtail possums and ringtail possums, the lipid concentration peaks in mid-lactation(Reference Cowan125,Reference Krockenberger126) . Koala milk has the highest milk lipid content of these three arboreal folivores(Reference Green, Merchant and Newgrain121,Reference Rose, Shetewi and Flowers124,Reference Krockenberger126) . Triacylglycerols are the major lipid type in both marsupial and bovine milk. Hydrolysis of triacylglycerol has yielded adequate levels of antimicrobial fatty acids and monoacylglycerols in human milk. The monoacylglycerols are known to exert antiviral, antibacterial and antiprotozoal effects(Reference German and Dillard120).

Fatty acids are known to have distinct biological roles(Reference Fox, Uniacke-Lowe and McSweeney111). Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) is a geometric isomer of linoleic acid (LA) present in bovine milk and has anticarcinogenic, growth-stimulating, antiatherogenic and immunomodulatory activity(Reference Parodi127). Actinobacteria within the human gut microbiome convert LA to CLA. LA, a precursor for the formation of CLA, has been identified in potoroo (Potorous tridactyius) and kangaroo milk. Bacteria from the phylum Actinobacteria have also been discovered in the gastrointestinal tracts of kangaroos(Reference Li, Jin and Li128) and koala(Reference Alfano, Courtiol and Vielgrader129). As a result, LA in milk may be digested within the pouch young gut to generate CLA, which may have bioactive functions similar to the human counterpart. To date, minimal research has been conducted to link the marsupial gut microbiotas and LA metabolism.

Fatty acids from marsupial milk, such as linoleic, oleic and palmitic acids(Reference Crowleyac, Woodward and Rose25), have antiviral properties in vitro (Reference Welsh and May130). Arachidonic acids are a type of polyunsaturated fatty acid that have been identified in varying amounts in the milk of many marsupial species(Reference Green, Griffiths and Leckie131,Reference Green and Merchant132) . In humans, many biological processes and tissues depend on arachidonic acid and its metabolites to develop and function, including skeletal muscle, immunological, brain and neural functions(Reference Tallima and El-Ridi133). Arachidonic acid in marsupial milk may have comparable bioactive functions. Unlike in bovine milk, omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) have not yet been detected in red kangaroo, eastern quoll (Dasyurus viverrinus) nor potoroo milk(Reference Green, Merchant and Newgrain121,Reference Green and Merchant132,Reference Griffiths134) . Given the importance of EPA and DHA for the development of the nervous systems of other mammals, their evasiveness from detection in marsupial milk warrants further investigation(Reference Harris, Dennison and Phoenix135Reference Swanson, Block and Mousa137).

Milk fat is carried in globules that are encapsulated by a phospholipid bilayer called the milk fat globular membrane (MFGM). Lipids and embedded MFGM proteins are of particular interest due to their health-promoting functionalities in mammals(Reference Xu, Zhou and Liu138). However, the functionalities of MFGM proteins and their ability to generate bioactive peptides in marsupial milk are largely unexplored.

MicroRNAs

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are known to have an array of biological activities, including organogenesis and morphogenesis, through gene regulation. They are most widely known in mammals for the role they play in lactation stage-dependent mammary gland growth. Recent research on the variable abundance of miRNA in milk suggests that they may also play a function in directing the development and immunological protection of joeys. Milk is thought to accomplish this by functioning as a carrier of miRNA and other bioactive components to growing young, resulting in exogenously generated miRNAs contributing to gene regulation in joeys. This hypothesis is supported further by the capacity of milk miRNAs to tolerate low pH and RNAse activity owing to the presence of exosomes that shield them from such extreme conditions. These miRNAs can enter the bloodstream alongside exosomes via the juvenile joey’s gut, or they might be digested, resulting in the release of miRNAs and subsequent absorption by gut cells(Reference Modepalli, Kumar and Hinds139,Reference Sharp, Modepalli and Enjapoori140) .

Conclusion

Recent advances in genomics, transcriptomics, lipidomics and proteomics have shed light on the array of bioactive components found in marsupial milk, mammary gland and pouch environment. Some of these are unique to marsupials and may support the healthy development of pouch young. Among several functions of these bioactive components, providing immunological protection to the young is of critical importance. These components play a pivotal role in safeguarding the developing marsupial against pathogens, thereby facilitating healthy growth and development within the pouch environment. Expression of these bioactive components can be either consistent throughout lactation or differentially expressed, and many show increased expression around birth and when the joey starts exiting the pouch at mid-lactation. Given their pivotal role, the uncharacterised potential bioactive components found in marsupials, which have demonstrated activity in eutherians, should be a focus for future studies. It is essential to conduct more investigations on both defined and uncharacterised beneficial compounds to determine their stability and functionality in the environmental conditions of the marsupials’ pouch and gastrointestinal tract. This approach will help us gain a better understanding of the resilience and efficacy of these compounds in the biological environments in which they function. However, large-scale studies on marsupial milk are not always feasible. Hence, methods require modification (down-scaling) to maximise the utility of rare samples. Current milk substitutes for orphaned joeys lack marsupial maternal immune compounds. This review examined current knowledge on maternal immune protection in joeys and identified potential avenues for future research to discover further potent bioactive components. These components could enhance existing milk supplement formulae, increasing the survival rates of orphaned, hand-reared marsupial joeys. Furthermore, different substitutes optimised for the different phases of lactation would be needed to meet the changing needs of the developing joeys. Therefore, although this review offers a preliminary understanding of the requirements of milk substitutes, further work is needed to design milk substitutes that meet marsupial joeys’ immune needs.

Acknowledgements

This manuscript was a collaborative effort between two nodes of the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science, specifically convened for the Marsupial Milk Project, namely the ‘Food and Agriculture Proteomics’ group at Edith Cowan University, Western Australia, and the ‘Australasian Wildlife Genomics’ group at The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Authorship

M.W.J.M. and C.E.G. led the conceptualisation and writing of the original draft, with M.W.J.M. also handling the reviewing, editing and visualisation of the information. M.G.N. and K.A.F. contributed to conceptualisation, reviewing, editing and supervision. E.P. assisted with conceptualisation, reviewing and editing, while A.J. was responsible for reviewing, editing and supervision. K.B. supported the project through conceptualisation and funding acquisition. C.J.H. and M.L.C. provided essential support in conceptualisation, reviewing, editing, supervision, project administration and funding acquisition. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Financial support

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science (grant number CE200100012).

Competing interests

The authors declare none.

References

Tyndale-Biscoe, C (2005) Life of marsupials. Collingwood: CSIRO publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, R & Handasyde, K (1999) The koala: Natural history, conservation and management. Sydney: UNSW Press.Google Scholar
Kuruppath, S, Bisana, S, Sharp, JA, et al. (2012) Monotremes and marsupials: comparative models to better understand the function of milk. J Biosci 37, 581588.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stannard, HJ, Miller, RD & Old, JM (2020) Marsupial and monotreme milk – a review of its nutrient and immune properties. PeerJ 8, 135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharp, J, Lefèvre, C & Nicholas, KR (2019) The comparative genomics of monotremes, marsupials, and pinnipeds: models to examine functions of milk proteins. In Milk proteins, 3rd ed., pp. 99141 [M Boland and H Singh, editors]. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Demmer, J, Ross, IK, Ginger, MR, et al. (1998) Differential expression of milk protein genes during lactation in the common brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula). J Mol Endocrinol 20, 3744.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joss, JL, Molloy, MP, Hinds, L, et al. (2009) A longitudinal study of the protein components of marsupial milk from birth to weaning in the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Dev Comp Immunol 33, 152161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Old, JM & Deane, EM (2000) Development of the immune system and immunological protection in marsupial pouch young. Dev Comp Immunol 24, 445454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maidment, TI, Bryan, ER, Pyne, M, et al. (2023) Characterisation of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) pouch microbiota in a captive population reveals a dysbiotic compositional profile associated with neonatal mortality. Microbiome 11, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, S, Taggart, D, Smith, I, et al. (2021) Host reproductive cycle influences the pouch microbiota of wild southern hairy-nosed wombats (Lasiorhinus latifrons). Anim Microbiome 3, 114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, Y & Belov, K (2017) Antimicrobial protection of marsupial pouch young. Front Microbiol 8, 354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, MJ, Hinds, LA, Deane, EM, et al. (2012) A review of complementary mechanisms which protect the developing marsupial pouch young. Dev Comp Immunol 37, 213220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doherty, TS, Geary, WL, Miritis, V, et al. (2023) Multiple threats affecting the marsupials of Australasia: impacts and management. In American and Australasian Marsupials, 1st ed., pp. 15311554 [NC Cáceres and CR Dickman, editors]. Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor-Brown, A, Booth, R, Gillett, A, et al. (2019) The impact of human activities on Australian wildlife. PloS One 14, 128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luo, ZX, Yuan, CX, Meng, QJ, et al. (2011) A Jurassic eutherian mammal and divergence of marsupials and placentals. Nature 476, 442445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peel, E, Cheng, Y, Djordjevic, JT, et al. (2016) Cathelicidins in the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii). Sci Rep 6, 19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peel, E, Cheng, Y, Djordjevic, JT, et al. (2021) Koala cathelicidin PhciCath5 has antimicrobial activity, including against Chlamydia pecorum . PLoS One 16, 120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hewavisenti, RV., Morris, KM, O’Meally, D, et al. (2016) The identification of immune genes in the milk transcriptome of the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii). PeerJ 4, 123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lefèvre, CM, Digby, MR, Whitley, JC, et al. (2007) Lactation transcriptomics in the Australian marsupial, Macropus eugenii: transcript sequencing and quantification. BMC Genomics 8, 114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, KM, O’Meally, D, Zaw, T, et al. (2016) Characterisation of the immune compounds in koala milk using a combined transcriptomic and proteomic approach. Sci Rep 6, 114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ambatipudi, K, Joss, J, Raftery, M et al. (2008) A proteomic approach to analysis of antimicrobial activity in marsupial pouch secretions. Dev Comp Immunol 32, 108120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bobek, G & Deane, EM (2001) Possible antimicrobial compounds from the pouch of the koala, Phascolarctos cinereus . Lett Pept Sci 8, 133137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baudinette, RV, Boontheung, P, Musgrave, IF, et al. (2005) Eugenin: an immunomodulator used to protect young in the pouch of the tammar wallaby, Macropus eugenii . FEBS J 2, 433443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, JA, Wanyonyi, S, Modepalli, V, et al. (2017) The tammar wallaby: a marsupial model to examine the timed delivery and role of bioactives in milk. Gen Comp Endocrinol 244, 164177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crowleyac, HM, Woodward, DR & Rose, RW (1988) Changes in milk composition during lactation in the potoroo, Potorous tridactyius (Marsupialia: Potoroinae). Aust J Bioi Sci 41, 289296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durham, SD, Wei, Z, Lemay, DG, et al. (2023) Creation of a milk oligosaccharide database, MilkOligoDB, reveals common structural motifs and extensive diversity across mammals. Sci Rep 13, 126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pharo, EA (2019) Marsupial milk: a fluid source of nutrition and immune factors for the developing pouch young. Reprod Fertil Dev CSIRO 31, 12521265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, KK & Keyte, AL (2020) Adaptations of the marsupial newborn: birth as an extreme environment. Anat Rec 303, 235249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, L, Basden, K, Cooper, DW, et al. (1997) Cellular components of the milk of the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Aust J Zool 45, 423433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, LJ & Deane, EM (2001) Cellular composition of the late milk of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). Aust J Zool 49, 195202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockson, A & McNeice, R (1980) Survival in the pouch: the role of macrophages and maternal milk cells. Comp Biochem Physiol A Comp Physiol 66, 221225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, K, Prentis, PJ, O’Meally, D, et al. (2014) The koala immunological toolkit: sequence identification and comparison of key markers of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) immune response. Aust J Zool 62, 195199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurley, WL & Theil, PK (2011) Perspectives on immunoglobulins in colostrum and milk. Nutrients 3, 442–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deane, EM & Cooper, DW (1984) Immunology of pouch young marsupials. I. Levels of immunoglobulin transferrin and albumin in the blood and milk of euros and wallaroos (hill kangaroos: Macropusrobustus, marsupialia). Dev Comp Immunol 8, 863876.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deane, EM, Cooper, DW & Renfreec, MB (1990) Immunoglobulin G levels in fetal and newborn tammar wallabies (Macropus eugenii). Reprod Fertil Dev 2, 369375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adamski, FM & Demmer, J (2000) Immunological protection of the vulnerable marsupial pouch young: two periods of immune transfer during lactation in Trichosurus vulpecula (brushtail possum). Dev Comp Immunol 24, 491502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daly, KA, Digby, M, Lefèvre, C, et al (2007) Analysis of the expression of immunoglobulins throughout lactation suggests two periods of immune transfer in the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Vet Immunol Immunopathol 120, 187200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yadav, M (1971) The transmissions of antibodies across the gut of pouch-young marsupials. Immunology 21, 839851.Google ScholarPubMed
Daly, KA, Digby, MR, Lefévre, C, et al. (2008) Identification, characterization and expression of cathelicidin in the pouch young of tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Comp Biochem Physiol 149, 524533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woof, JM & Kerr, MA (2006) The function of immunoglobulin A in immunity. J Pathol 208, 270282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adamski, FM & Demmer, J (1990) Two stages of increased IgA transfer during lactation in the marsupial, Trichosurus vulpecula (brushtail possum). J Immunol 162, 60096015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwek, JHL, Wynne, A, Lefèvre, C, et al. (2006) Molecular evolution of a novel marsupial S100 protein (S100A19) which is expressed at specific stages of mammary gland and gut development. Mol Phylogenet Evol 69, 416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryckman, C, Vandal, K, Rouleau, P, et al. (2003) Proinflammatory activities of S100: proteins S100A8, S100A9, and S100A8/A9 induce neutrophil chemotaxis and adhesion. J Immunol 170, 32333242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Büchau, AS, Hassan, M, Kukova, G, et al. (2007) S100A15, an antimicrobial protein of the skin: regulation by E. coli through Toll-like receptor 4. J Invest Dermatol 127, 25962604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pirr, S, Richter, M, Fehlhaber, B, et al. (2017) High amounts of S100-alarmins confer antimicrobial activity on human breast milk targeting pathogens relevant in neonatal sepsis. Front Immunol 8, 110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, S, Song, R, Wang, Z, et al. (2018) S100A8/A9 in inflammation. Front Immunol 9, 114.Google ScholarPubMed
Gläser, R, Harder, J, Lange, H, et al. (2005) Antimicrobial psoriasin (S100A7) protects human skin from Escherichia coli infection. Nat Immunol 6, 5764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ragland, SA & Criss, AK (2017) From bacterial killing to immune modulation: recent insights into the functions of lysozyme. PLoS Pathog 13, 122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irwin, DM, Biegel, JM & Stewart, CB (2011) Evolution of the mammalian lysozyme gene family. BMC Evol Biol 11, 116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peel, E, Silver, L, Brandies, P, et al. (2021) A reference genome for the critically endangered woylie, Bettongia penicillata ogilbyi . GigaByte 2021, 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, RN, O’Meally, D, Chen, Z, et al. (2018) Adaptation and conservation insights from the koala genome. Nat Genet 50, 11021111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stammnitz, MR, Gori, K, Kwon, YM, et al. (2023) The evolution of two transmissible cancers in Tasmanian devils. Science 380, 283293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joss, J, Molloy, M, Hinds, L, et al. (2007) Proteomic analysis of early lactation milk of the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Comp Biochem Physiol Part D Genomics Proteomics 2, 150164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholas, K, Loughnan, M, Messer, M, et al. (1989) Isolation, partial sequence and asynchronous appearance during lactation of lysozyme and alpha-lactalbumin in the milk of a marsupial, the common ringtail possum (Pseudocheirus peregrinus). Comp Biochem Physiol B 94, 775778.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piotte, CP, Marshall, CJ, Hubbard, MJ, et al. (1997) Lysozyme and α-lactalbumin from the milk of a marsupial, the common brush-tailed possum (Trichosurus vulpecula). Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj 1336, 235242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vander Jagt, CJ, Whitley, JC, Cocks, BG, et al. (2016) Gene expression in the mammary gland of the tammar wallaby during the lactation cycle reveals conserved mechanisms regulating mammalian lactation. Reprod Fertil Dev 28, 12411257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuy, S, Kelly, VC, Smit, AM, et al. (2007) Proteomic analysis of whey and casein proteins in early milk from the marsupial Trichosurus vulpecula, the common brushtail possum. Comp Biochem Physiol Part D Genomics Proteomics 2, 112120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ambatipudi, K, Joss, J & Deane, E (2007) A comparative proteomic analysis of skin secretions of the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii) and the wombat (Vombatus ursinus ) Comp Biochem Physiol Part D Genomics Proteomics 2, 322331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kell, DB, Heyden, EL & Pretorius, E. (2020) The biology of lactoferrin, an iron-binding protein that can help defend against viruses and bacteria. Front Immunol 11, 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barber, MF, Kronenberg, Z, Yandell, M, et al. (2016) Antimicrobial functions of lactoferrin promote genetic conflicts in ancient primates and modern humans. PLoS Genet 12, 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hughes, AL & Friedman, R (2014) Evolutionary diversification of the vertebrate transferrin multi-gene family. Immunogenetics 66, 651661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grigor, MR, Bennett, BL, Carne, A, et al. (1991) Whey proteins of the common brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula): isolation, characterization and changes in concentration in milk during lactation of transferrin, α-lactalbumin and serum albumin. Comp Biochem Physiol B 98, 451459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, TS, Roghanian, A, Simpson, AJ, et al. (2011) WAP domain proteins as modulators of mucosal immunity. Biochem Soc Trans 39, 14091415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiesner, J & Vilcinskas, A (2010) Antimicrobial peptides: the ancient arm of the human immune system. Virulence 1, 440464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iwamori, T, Nukumi, N, Itoh, K, et al. (2010) Bacteriostatic activity of whey acidic protein (WAP). J Vet Med Sci 72, 621625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Topcic, D, Auguste, A, De Leo, AA, et al. (2009) Characterization of the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii) whey acidic protein gene; new insights into the function of the protein. Evol Dev 11, 363375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharp, JA, Lefèvre, C & Nicholas, KR (2007) Molecular evolution of monotreme and marsupial whey acidic protein genes. Evol Dev 9, 378392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholas, KR, Fisher, JA, Muths, E, et al. (2001) Secretion of whey acidic protein and cystatin is down. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 129, 851858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demmer, J, Stasiuk, SJ, Adamski, FM, et al. (1999) Cloning and expression of the transferrin and ferritin genes in a marsupial, the brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula). Biochim Biophys Acta 1445, 6574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, AP, Sharp, JA, Lefevre, C, et al. (2012) WFDC2 is differentially expressed in the mammary gland of the tammar wallaby and provides immune protection to the mammary gland and the developing pouch young. Dev Comp Immunol 36, 584590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth-Walter, F, Pacios, LF, Gomez-Casado, C, et al. (2014) The major cow milk allergen Bos d 5 manipulates T-helper cells depending on its load with siderophore-bound iron. PLoS One 9, 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brew, K (2003) alpha-Lactalbumin. Adv Dairy Chem 1, 388419.Google Scholar
Wang, X & Zhang, B (2014) Integrating genomic, transcriptomic, and interactome data to improve peptide and protein identification in shotgun proteomics. J Proteome Res 13, 27152723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pellegrini, A, Thomas, U, Bramaz, N, et al. (1999) Isolation and identification of three bactericidal domains in the bovine α-lactalbumin molecule. Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj 1426, 439448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pellegrini, A, Dettling, C, Thomas, U, et al. (2001) Isolation and characterization of four bactericidal domains in the bovine β-lactoglobulin Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj 1526, 131140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lefèvre, CM, Digby, MR, Whitley, JC, et al. (2007) Lactation transcriptomics in the Australian marsupial, Macropus eugenii: transcript sequencing and quantification. BMC Genomics 8, 114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abe, S, Onoda, R, Furushima, D, et al. (2023) Detection of CCL25 and the correlation between CCL25, CCL28, IL-7, and TSLP in human breast milk. J Reprod Immunol 155, 15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uehara, S, Hayes, SM, Li, L, et al. (2006) Premature expression of chemokine receptor CCR9 impairs T cell development. J Immunol 176, 7584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, E & Butcher, EC (2004) CCL28 controls immunoglobulin (Ig) A plasma cell accumulation in the lactating mammary gland and IgA antibody transfer to the neonate. J Exp Med 200, 805809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, EP, Kuklin, NA, Youngman, KR, et al. (2002) The intestinal chemokine thymus-expressed chemokine (CCL25) attracts IgA antibody-secreting cells. J Exp Med 195, 269275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hieshima, K, Ohtani, H, Shibano, M, et al. (2003) CCL28 has dual roles in mucosal immunity as a chemokine with broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. J Immunol 170, 14521461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Janeway, C, Travers, P, Walport, M, et al. (2001) Immunobiology: The immune system in health and disease. New York: Garland Science.Google Scholar
Kościuczuk, EM, Lisowski, P, Jarczak, J, et al. (2012) Cathelicidins: family of antimicrobial peptides. a review. Mol Biol Rep 39, 1095710970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, D, Biragyn, A, Hoover, DM, et al. (2004) Multiple roles of antimicrobial defensins, cathelicidins, and eosinophil-derived neurotoxin in host defense. Annu Rev Immunol 22, 181215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petrohilos, C, Patchett, A, Hogg, CJ, et al. (2023) Tasmanian devil cathelicidins exhibit anticancer activity against Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD) cells. Sci Rep 13, 111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bals, R & Wilson, JM (2003) Cathelicidins – a family of multifunctional antimicrobial peptides. Cell Mol Life Sci 60, 711720.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganz, T (2003) Defensins: antimicrobial peptides of innate immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 3, 710720.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hazlett, L & Wu, M (2011) Defensins in innate immunity. Cell Tissue Res 343, 175188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van-Harten, RM, van-Woudenbergh, E, van-Dijk, A, et al. (2018) Cathelicidins: immunomodulatory antimicrobials. Vaccines 6, 123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peel, E, Cheng, Y, Djordjevic, JT, et al. (2017) Marsupial and monotreme cathelicidins display antimicrobialactivity, including against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus . Microbiology 163, 14571465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belov, K, Sanderson, CE, Deakin, JE, et al. (2007) Characterization of the opossum immune genome provides insights into the evolution of the mammalian immune system. Genome Res 17, 982991.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carman, RL, Simonian, MR, Old, JM, et al. (2008) Immunohistochemistry using antibodies to the cathelicidin LL37/hCAP18 in the tammar wallaby, Macropus eugenii . Tissue Cell 40, 459466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wanyonyi, SS, Sharp, JA, Khalil, E, et al. (2011) Tammar wallaby mammary cathelicidins are differentially expressed during lactation and exhibit antimicrobial and cell proliferative activity. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol 160, 431439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, EA, Yuanyuan, C, O’Meally, D, et al. (2017) Characterization of the antimicrobial peptide family defensins in the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii), koala (Phascolarctos cinereus), and tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Immunogenetics 69, 133143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peel, E, Hogg, C & Belov, K (2024) Characterisation of defensins across the marsupial family tree. Dev Comp Immunol 158, 111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baricelli, J, Rocafull, MA, Vázquez, D, et al. (2015) β-defensin-2 in breast milk displays a broad antimicrobial activity against pathogenic bacteria. J Pediatr 91, 3643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tunzi, CR, Harper, PA, Bar-Oz, B, et al. (2000) β-defensin expression in human mammary gland epithelia. Pediatr Res 48, 3035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rasmussen, LK, Johnsen, LB, Petersen, TE, et al. (2002) Human GlyCAM-1 mRNA is expressed in the mammary gland as splicing variants and encodes various aberrant truncated proteins. Immunol Lett 1, 7375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groenen, MAM, Dijkhof, RJM & ban-der-Poel, JJ (1995) Characterization of a GlyCAM1-like gene (glycosylation-dependent cell adhesion molecule 1) which is highly and specifically expressed in the lactating bovine mammary gland. Gene 158, 189195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campagna, S, Mathot, AG & Fleury, Y, et al (2004) Antibacterial activity of lactophoricin, a synthetic 23-residues peptide derived from the sequence of bovine milk component-3 of proteose peptone. J Dairy Sci 87, 16211626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inagaki, M, Nagai, S, Yabe, T, et al. (2010) The bovine lactophorin C-terminal fragment and PAS6/7 were both potent in the inhibition of human rotavirus replication in cultured epithelial cells and the prevention of experimental gastroenteritis Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 74, 13861390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schittek, B, Hipfel, R, Sauer, B, et al (2001) Dermcidin: a novel human antibiotic peptide secreted by sweat glands. Nat Immunol. 2, 11331137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schittek, B (2012) The multiple facets of dermcidin in cell survival and host defense. J Innate Immun 4, 349360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jäkälä, P & Vapaatalo, H (2010) Antihypertensive peptides from milk proteins. Pharmaceuticals 3, 251272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholas, KR (1988) Asynchronous dual lactation in a marsupial, the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Biochem Biophys Res Commun 154, 529533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vercruysse, L, Van Camp, J, Dewettinck, K, et al. (2009) Production and enrichment of bioactive peptides derived from milk proteins. In Dairy-derived ingredients, 1st ed., pp. 5167 [M Corredig, editor]. UK: Woodhead Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stasiuk, SJ, Summers, EL & Demmer, J (2000) Cloning of a marsupial k-casein cDNA from the brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula). Reprod Fertil Dev 12, 215222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horne, DS, Anema, S, Zhu, X, et al. (2007) A lactational study of the composition and integrity of casein micelles from the milk of the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Arch Biochem Biophys 467, 107118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, SV & Malcata, FX (2005) Caseins as source of bioactive peptides. Int Dairy J 15, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, SDH, Liang, N, Rathish, H, et al. (2023) Bioactive milk peptides: an updated comprehensive overview and database. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. Published online: 28 Jul 2023. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2023.2240396.Google ScholarPubMed
Fox, PF, Uniacke-Lowe, T, McSweeney, PLH, et al. (2015) Biologically active compounds in milk. In Dairy Chemistry and Biochemistry, 1st ed., pp. 415497 [PLH McSweeney, editor]. Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, WE, Sharman, GB, Scott, KJ, et al. (1982) Composition of milk from red and grey kangaroos with particular reference to vitamins. Aust J BioI Sci 35, 607616.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaucheron, F (2014) Milk and dairy products: a unique micronutrient combination. J Am Coll Nutr 30, Suppl. 5, 400S409S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denny, KJ, Jeanes, A, Fathe, K, et al. (2013) Neural tube defects, folate, and immune modulation. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 97, 602609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Urashima, T, Horiuchi, R, Sakanaka, M, et al. (2023) Lactose or milk oligosaccharide: which is significant among mammals? Anim Front 13, 1423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engfer, MB, Stahl, B, Finke, B, et al. (2000) Human milk oligosaccharides are resistant to enzymatic hydrolysis in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Am J Clin Nutr 71, 15891596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Urashima, T, Fukuda, K & Messer, M (2012) Evolution of milk oligosaccharides and lactose: a hypothesis. Animal 6, 369374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newburg, DS (1996) Oligosaccharides and glycoconjugates in human milk: their role in host defense. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 1, 271283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, ID (1982) The digestive physiology of marsupials. Comp Biochem Physiol A Physiol 71, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
German, JB & Dillard, CJ (2006) Composition, structure and absorption of milk lipids: a source of energy, fat-soluble nutrients and bioactive molecules. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 46, 5792.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, B, Merchant, J & Newgrain, K (1987) Milk composition in the eastern quoll, Dasyurus viverrinus (Marsupialia : Dasyuridae). Aust J BioI Sci 40, 379388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ikonomopoulou, MP, Smolenski, AP & Rose, RW (2005) Changes in milk composition during lactation in the eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) (Marsupialia: Peramelidae). Aust J BioI Sci 53, 5965.Google Scholar
Muths, E (1996) Milk composition in a field population of red kangaroos, Macropus rufus (Desmarest) (Macropodidae: Marsupialia). Aust J Zool 44, 165175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, RW, Shetewi, AD & Flowers, K (2005) Milk composition of the Tasmanian pademelon (Thylogale billardierii Desmarest) (Macropodoidea: Marsupialia) in captivity. Aust J Zool 53, 6771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, PE (1989) Changes in milk composition during lactation in the common brushtail possum, Trichosurus vulpecula (Marsupialia: Phalangeridae). Reprod Fertil Dev 1, 325335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krockenberger, AK (1996) Composition of the milk of the koala, Phascolarctos cinereus, an arboreal folivore. Phsiol Zool 69, 701718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parodi, PW (1999) Conjugated linoleic acid and other anticarcinogenic agents of bovine milk fat. J Dairy Sci 82, 13391349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, M, Jin, W, Li, Y, et al. (2016) Spatial dynamics of the bacterial community structure in the gastrointestinal tract of red kangaroo (Macropus rufus). World J Microbiol Biotechnol 32, 19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alfano, N, Courtiol, A, Vielgrader, H, et al. (2015) Variation in koala microbiomes within and between individuals: effect of body region and captivity status. Sci Rep 5, 112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welsh, JK & May, JT (1979) Anti-infective properties of breast milk. J Pediatr 94, 19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, B, Griffiths, M & Leckie, RM (1983) Qualitative and quantitative changes in milk fat during lactation in the tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). Aust J BioI Sci 36, 455462.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, B & Merchant, JC (1988) The composition of marsupial milk. In The developing marsupial: Models for biomedical research, 1st ed., pp. 4154 [C Tyndale-Biscoe and JC Merchant, editors]. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tallima, H & El-Ridi, R (2018) Arachidonic acid: physiological roles and potential health benefits – a review. J Adv Res 11, 3341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, M (1978) The biology of monotremes. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Harris, F, Dennison, SR & Phoenix, DA (2009) Anionic antimicrobial peptides from eukaryotic organisms. Curr Protein Pept Sci 10, 585606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milte, CM, Parletta, N, Buckley, JD, et al. (2012) Eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids, cognition, and behavior in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Nutrition 28, 670677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swanson, D, Block, R & Mousa, SA (2012) Omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA: health benefits throughout life. Adv Nutr 3, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, D, Zhou, S, Liu, Y, et al. (2024) Complement in breast milk modifies offspring gut microbiota to promote infant health. Cell 187, 750763.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Modepalli, V, Kumar, A, Hinds, LA, et al. (2014) Differential temporal expression of milk miRNA during the lactation cycle of the marsupial tammar wallaby (Macropus eugenii). BMC Genomics 15, 118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharp, JA, Modepalli, V, Enjapoori, AK, et al. (2015) Bioactive functions of milk proteins: a comparative genomics approach. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 19, 289302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Bioactive components present in mammary gland, milk and pouch environment

Figure 1

Figure 1. Differential expression of lactoferrin between early and late proteomes. Lactoferricin accounted for 49·4% of all transcripts expressed in koala milk during late lactation, but just 0·19% of transcripts produced during early lactation.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Bioactive roles of cathelicidin.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Other potentially bioactive maternal compounds.

Figure 4

Figure 4. (1) Oligosaccharides (A) promote the proliferation of beneficial bacteria (B) while serving as receptor analogues and binding to invading pathogens (C), blocking their attachment to the gut epithelium. (2) Proliferation of beneficial microflora results in lower pH levels, which leads to competitive inhibition of potentially pathogenic microflora (1. D).